Is being anti homosexual anti christian?

[feetxxxl]

The “fruit of the spirit”, as you put it, is not enough, as you’re considering it. The spirit and the body are inseperable, as the “body and soul” is ONE THING, and not a soul INHABITING a body.

A person IS there body and soul, as God created them.

A biological male is a male person, and a biological female is a female person, and each was made for the other.

Same sex sexual behavior is, a priori, disordered and an evil. You either accept that, or not.

A chronically disodered situation (way of life) is ALWAYS bad for those who live in it and those who come into contact with it.

The truth is that living in a state of constant unrepentant sin is not good for those who live that way, or those whom they contact.

You may believe as you wish, but it is crystal clear to those who believe as the Church believes that while it’s easy say that “sexual acts between ‘homosexuals’ enhances their environment”, it’s the exact equivalent of saying that living in a constant and unrepentent state of mortal sin is acceptable.

We can’t say that. Sorry.

Huh? Please make yourself understandable.

If one is not “chaste”, which means in a loving MARRIED man-woman relationship, then they are “unchaste”, and in mortal sin, which produces what sin always produces.

“Homosexual” sex acts are just a type of unchasteness, and are not special in any way other than having a “lobbying group” to make them SEEM acceptable.

I appreciate your “obsession” with the “fruits” argument, as it is a nice way for you to justify the unjustifiable in your own mind, which is an easy thing to do when you take the bible ALONE as a source of “instruction” and do so by using it out of context via your own interpretation,… but your argument evaporates instantly when you simply accept what the Church states as the principle of “Chastity”.

If you’re not Catholic, you don’t have to accept what the Church says, and can believe as you wish,… and suffer the consequences.

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

the problem with your understanding it is without witness. the thing that has always bothered me about my fellow believers is there response to homosexuality.

jesus said love one another as i have loved you. if we have love for those who share our inheritance, and they say they are engage in something that characteristically is thought of as sin, and that they believe it is not sin. i would think the first thing the body would do would we to run to them to witness if what they are saying is true or not. and if it is not true to witness together in fellowship how it is not true or vica versa. so that unity could be maintained…the thing that paul stresses at the end of romans

but i see just the reverse …for the the sake of mindset… what is the spirit of homosexuality that it would come against the fruit of the spirit ansd the spirit of christ.

john 16:12"I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. 13But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. 14He will bring glory to me by taking from what is mine and making it known to you. 15All that belongs to the Father is mine. That is why I said the Spirit will take from what is mine and make it known to you."

1 thessalonians 5:21
Test everything. Hold on to the good

my understanding is that our witness is our test, because witness is apart from mindset,cultural conditioning, and bias.

for everything you speak , you speak of no test . what is your test?

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

Well you asked. One of the first things my mother taught me is its not good to stick things up your anus.

You had to be taught that?! I would think it’s a normal function of being a human… only stuff is supposed to come out of that hole.

 

[feetxxxl]

The “fruit of the spirit”, as you put it, is not enough, as you’re considering it. The spirit and the body are inseperable, as the “body and soul” is ONE THING, and not a soul INHABITING a body.

A person IS there body and soul, as God created them.

A biological male is a male person, and a biological female is a female person, and each was made for the other.

Same sex sexual behavior is, a priori, disordered and an evil. You either accept that, or not.

A chronically disodered situation (way of life) is ALWAYS bad for those who live in it and those who come into contact with it.

The truth is that living in a state of constant unrepentant sin is not good for those who live that way, or those whom they contact.

You may believe as you wish, but it is crystal clear to those who believe as the Church believes that while it’s easy say that “sexual acts between ‘homosexuals’ enhances their environment”, it’s the exact equivalent of saying that living in a constant and unrepentent state of mortal sin is acceptable.

We can’t say that. Sorry.

Huh? Please make yourself understandable.

If one is not “chaste”, which means in a loving MARRIED man-woman relationship, then they are “unchaste”, and in mortal sin, which produces what sin always produces.

“Homosexual” sex acts are just a type of unchasteness, and are not special in any way other than having a “lobbying group” to make them SEEM acceptable.

I appreciate your “obsession” with the “fruits” argument, as it is a nice way for you to justify the unjustifiable in your own mind, which is an easy thing to do when you take the bible ALONE as a source of “instruction” and do so by using it out of context via your own interpretation,… but your argument evaporates instantly when you simply accept what the Church states as the principle of “Chastity”.

If you’re not Catholic, you don’t have to accept what the Church says, and can believe as you wish,… and suffer the consequences.

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

you and i are the church

didnt jesus say if two or three are gathered together in my name i will grant their requests.

 

[feetxxxl]

How would the fact that it cannot be changed make it not disordered? How do you understand the term disordered?

Thanks,
Mark

my concern is not whether it is choice or innate but only if it is of the spirit of christ. i have no intention of relying on science to dictate my theology.

 

[feetxxxl]

Both.

Jesus Christ fulfilled the Law.

Because I believe in the truth./QUOTe)

my understanding is that “i believe” is about the concept of i. i believe this , i dont believe that. the one thing we have that is apart from i is our shared relatioionship with christ

in 1john1 john writes that which WE have seen.

 

[feetxxxl]

God’s will? Genesis starts off with the idea of procreation before the fall by giving the instruction of be fruitful and multiply. Deutoronomy tells the Hebrew people to Choose Life confirming the initial request. And scripture time and time again says God does not change. You my friend, and I am trying to reach out ot you as a friend, are trying to pit scripture against itself. Instead look at the whole picture, especially the Song of Songs. It presents God’s will for the intent of heterosexual marriage only. In your particular reference Paul is calling on the Romans to see the beauty of that message, not to suddenly decide for yourself what is right and wrong.

then please speak thru your understanding of christ the truth, the life, and, the way. everything of the old testament has been clarified by christ…the sabbath was made for man not man for the sabbath.

numbers15: 32 While the Israelites were in the desert, a man was found gathering wood on the Sabbath day. 33 Those who found him gathering wood brought him to Moses and Aaron and the whole assembly, 34 and they kept him in custody, because it was not clear what should be done to him. 35 Then the LORD said to Moses, “The man must die. The whole assembly must stone him outside the camp.” 36 So the assembly took him outside the camp and stoned him to death, as the LORD commanded

 

[mercygate]

the problem with your understanding it is without witness. the thing that has always bothered me about my fellow believers is there response to homosexuality.

jesus said love one another as i have loved you. if we have love for those who share our inheritance, and they say they are engage in something that characteristically thought as sin and that they believe it is not sin. i would think the first thing the body would do would we to run to them to witness if what they are saying is true or not. and if it is not true to witness together in fellowship how it is not true or vica versa. so that unity could be maintained…the thing that paul stresses at the end of romans

but i see just the reverse …for the the sake of mindset… what is the spirit of homosexuality that it would come against the fruit of the spirit ansd the spirit of christ.

john 16:12"I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. 13But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. 14He will bring glory to me by taking from what is mine and making it known to you. 15All that belongs to the Father is mine. That is why I said the Spirit will take from what is mine and make it known to you."

1 thessalonians 5:21
Test everything. Hold on to the good

my understanding is that our witness is our test, because witness is apart from mindset,cultural conditioning, and bias.

for everything you speak , you speak of no test . what is your test?

Let’s agree that the test is love. If the Christian position is that homosexual acts (not people) are sinful – and since for Christians all sexual expression is reserved for marriage, we don’t even need to address the homosexual question, only the sex-outside-of-marriage question – then would you, as a test of love, forego that for Jesus Christ?

 

[Keikiolu]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keikiolu forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
*The “fruit of the spirit”, as you put it, is not enough, as you’re considering it. The spirit and the body are inseperable, as the “body and soul” is ONE THING, and not a soul INHABITING a body.

A person IS there body and soul, as God created them.

A biological male is a male person, and a biological female is a female person, and each was made for the other.

Same sex sexual behavior is, a priori, disordered and an evil. You either accept that, or not.

A chronically disodered situation (way of life) is ALWAYS bad for those who live in it and those who come into contact with it.

The truth is that living in a state of constant unrepentant sin is not good for those who live that way, or those whom they contact.

You may believe as you wish, but it is crystal clear to those who believe as the Church believes that while it’s easy say that “sexual acts between ‘homosexuals’ enhances their environment”, it’s the exact equivalent of saying that living in a constant and unrepentent state of mortal sin is acceptable.

We can’t say that. Sorry.

Huh? Please make yourself understandable.

If one is not “chaste”, which means in a loving MARRIED man-woman relationship, then they are “unchaste”, and in mortal sin, which produces what sin always produces.

“Homosexual” sex acts are just a type of unchasteness, and are not special in any way other than having a “lobbying group” to make them SEEM acceptable.

I appreciate your “obsession” with the “fruits” argument, as it is a nice way for you to justify the unjustifiable in your own mind, which is an easy thing to do when you take the bible ALONE as a source of “instruction” and do so by using it out of context via your own interpretation,… but your argument evaporates instantly when you simply accept what the Church states as the principle of “Chastity”.

If you’re not Catholic, you don’t have to accept what the Church says, and can believe as you wish,… and suffer the consequences.

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.*

**you and i are the church

didnt jesus say if two or three are gathered together in my name i will grant their requests.**

You and I are not the whole of the Church, and we can’t regard ourselves as such.

You choose to obey your own interpretation of what it is to act as “a Christian”, and that is your right as a creature with free will, but in so doing you choose not to obey the will of God, as expressed by the Magisterium of the Church, and actively align yourself with the one who entices us to place our wants above God’s requirements.

And if you’re not a Catholic, that’s not a problem for you, as you don’t consider any authority to supercede your own “interpretation” of God’s will.

So we’ll have to agree to disagree on the issue of whether “homosexual sex acts” are sinful or not.

(( And, by the way, being “chaste” doesn’t require one to be in a loving married man-woman relationship, as you are also chaste if you are not performing sexual acts in any way at all. In other words, being chaste is either having NO sex whatsoever, or having it only in a loving married man-woman relationship. Just thought I’d clarify that, as I left that somewhat ambiguous. ))

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

 

[gardenswithkids]

…jesus said love one another as i have loved you. if we have love for those who share our inheritance, and they say they are engage in something that characteristically is thought of as sin, and that they believe it is not sin. i would think the first thing the body would do would we to run to them to witness if what they are saying is true or not. and if it is not true to witness together in fellowship how it is not true or vica versa. so that unity could be maintained

??? Didn’t we do that in responding to your thread???

We read what you wrote/write on your thread. We see for ourselves you are mistaken about your understanding of sex, love and sin. We witness to you about how the sexual union between a husband and wife images the love between Christ and the Church. We witness to you that God intended human love to be fruitful and mulitiply. Then you repeatedly compare the procreation of children with eternal souls to dogs.

Jesus came to save us from sin, not to deny the existance of sin. You seem to think “love” means we must agree with you that there is no such thing as sexual sin. We can’t agree with because we must speak the truth in love.

 

[mercygate]

in romas paul says you cannot receive god’s righteousness by following the law.

Point of clarification: In Romans, the whole context of “law” is the levitical law. Paul draws a very clear distinction between the “law written on the hearts of men” and the works of the mosaic law, particularly circumcision. The thrust of that letter, as any elementary commentary will tell you was to counter the early Judaizing heresy addressed at the Council of Jerusalem. The Judaizers were insisting that gentiles be circumcised. Paul was adamant that such works of the law placed them under the old covenant, which had been superceded by the Gospel.

You are flirting with antinomianism, which, in his diatribe against impurity (v. 24-25), Paul defines as exchanging the truth about God for a lie and worshiping the creature rather than the creator.

 

[feetxxxl]

Let’s agree that the test is love. If the Christian position is that homosexual acts (not people) are sinful – and since for Christians all sexual expression is reserved for marriage, we don’t even need to address the homosexual question, only the sex-outside-of-marriage question – then would you, as a test of love, forego that for Jesus Christ?

i dont understand what you are asking?

 

[mercygate]

i dont understand what you are asking?

Yes you do. I am asking you whether, if Our Lord asked it of you, you would give up this “possession” for his sake.

I’m not expecting you to answer here and now. We do not deserve an answer. But you need to ask it of yourself.

 

[Maxply]

. . . well, for me, FeetXXXL, all I hope for from you is that you will reconsider your apparent antipathy to capital letters!

I trust this is an idiosyncracy and not a political statement! I mean, after all, capitalism can be a good thing as well as a bad thing.

 

[feetxxxl]

You and I are not the whole of the Church, and we can’t regard ourselves as such.

You choose to obey your own interpretation of what it is to act as “a Christian”, and that is your right as a creature with free will, but in so doing you choose not to obey the will of God, as expressed by the Magisterium of the Church, and actively align yourself with the one who entices us to place our wants above God’s requirements.

And if you’re not a Catholic, that’s not a problem for you, as you don’t consider any authority to supercede your own “interpretation” of God’s will.

So we’ll have to agree to disagree on the issue of whether “homosexual sex acts” are sinful or not.

(( And, by the way, being “chaste” doesn’t require one to be in a loving married man-woman relationship, as you are also chaste if you are not performing sexual acts in any way at all. In other words, being chaste is either having NO sex whatsoever, or having it only in a loving married man-woman relationship. Just thought I’d clarify that, as I left that somewhat ambiguous. ))

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

just as an aside… do you believe that the church was justified in everyone they burned at the stake. what is your take on luther’s act of rebellion and his 95 points?

what is your understanding of our eventual judgement? will god be asking if we obeyed the institutional church’s understanding of his will or will he be judging our hearts?

in john 4 jesus does not say the true worshippers will be the ones who obey the understanding of those he puts in authority. in his statement he dismisses the understanding of the those in authority, and says the true worshippers will worship in spirit and in truth. you say truth is what the instiutional church says is truth. but paul say otherwise.

romans1:18The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

paul is speaking of witness.

 

[setter]

jesus did fulfill the law…romans says the fulfillment of the law is love

scripture says that all the laws can be summed in the commandment love your neighbor as yourself

Yes, as John so often reminds us and that love and truth are inseparable:

“Little children, let us not love in word or speech but in deed and in truth.” 1 John 3: 18

“Grace, mercy, and peace will be with us, from God the Father and from Jesus Christ the Father’s Son, in truth and love.”** 2 John 1: 3 **

 

[setter]

setter;2260807:

Both.

Jesus Christ fulfilled the Law.

Because I believe in the truth.

my understanding is that “i believe” is about the concept of i. i believe this , i dont believe that. the one thing we have that is apart from i is our shared relatioionship with christ

in 1john1 john writes that which WE have seen.

For a Catholic, “I believe” is about a Person, the person of Jesus Christ, who is Truth incarnate …no concept here. Jesus Christ made exclusive claims that He alone is “the way, and the truth, and the life”.

"Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me.” John 14: 6

 

[feetxxxl]

??? Didn’t we do that in responding to your thread???

We read what you wrote/write on your thread. We see for ourselves you are mistaken about your understanding of sex, love and sin. We witness to you about how the sexual union between a husband and wife images the love between Christ and the Church. We witness to you that God intended human love to be fruitful and mulitiply. Then you repeatedly compare the procreation of children with eternal souls to dogs.

Jesus came to save us from sin, not to deny the existance of sin. You seem to think “love” means we must agree with you that there is no such thing as sexual sin. We can’t agree with because we must speak the truth in love.

from the start i have consistently asked three questions.
(1)what is your witness of your understanding? remember witness is apart from your belief system…its what you see in your heart in thru fellowship in the spirit…see thru the place where christ lives.
(2) what is your test?1thess says" test everything …keep the good." your witness is your test. peter had one understanding about the gentiles. when he witessed at cornelius’s house he encountered another thru his witness… one essence of paul’s entire epistle is about witnessing.

romans 1:1818The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

paul says god has given man the capacity to not only know he exists, but also the capacity to discern what god is showing him, that is… what is of him and not of him. so that no man has an excuse to sin. this is witness.

the power of 1john1 is that it came from witness in fellowship…“that which we saw, that which we touched…”

(3)what is the spirit of homosexuality that is comes against the fruit of the spirit and the spirit of christ…knowing our battle is not against flesh and blood, but powers and principalities. if you believe paul in romans 1:26-27, is referring to homosexuals, you have to say shame based lust. that is what you may believe. but is that what you have witnessed? without witness all you have is unsubstantiated belief. what is it you saw when you have fellowshipped with homosexual believers?

so far no one has answered them.

 

[Keikiolu]

from the start i have consistently asked three questions.
(1)what is your witness of your understanding? remember witness is apart from your belief system…its what you see in your heart in thru fellowship in the spirit…see thru the place where christ lives.

My “witness” is the observations of the Church, which explains to me why I am to believe as I believe about this subject.

Your “witness”, in my opinion, is your personal DESIRE to find a comfortable excuse for believing as you do, which is provided by yur observations of apparently “nice” people who are “homosexuals”.

Your method of “witness” is fraught with error, in being too reliant on “personal interpretation”, and not relying on the genuine authority in this subject area (faith and morals).

(2) what is your test?1thess says" test everything …keep the good." your witness is your test. peter had one understanding about the gentiles. when he witessed at cornelius’s house he encountered another thru his witness… one essence of paul’s entire epistle is about witnessing.

My test is what the Magisterium says, and whether it is sensible to me, which it had better be or I’m not Catholic.

Peter’s “witness” was a revelation from God. Remember that little incident of the vision before the visit?

Peter didn’t TEST the revelation given to him. He simply experienced the actuality of what had been revealed to him.

When it is said that we should “test”, it means that we should test things against what has been revealed to us, and the most grand revelation is Christianity in it’s fullness revealed through the Magisterium.

romans 1:1818The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

That is correct, and you are without excuse in denying the truth as shown by the Magisterium.

Therefore, why do you argue with the Magisterium?

paul says god has given man the capacity to not only know he exists, but also the capacity to discern what god is showing him, that is… what is of him and not of him. so that no man has an excuse to sin. this is witness.

Yes. Man, as in mankind, is able to discern what God is showing him, and the deposit of faith, the collected and constantly growing “discernment of God’s revelation”, is with the Magisterium.

the power of 1john1 is that it came from witness in fellowship…“that which we saw, that which we touched…”

You’ll have to be more clear as to what you’re trying to get at with this passage in this context. Thanks.

…continued below →

 

[Keikiolu]

…continued from above:

(3)what is the spirit of homosexuality that is comes against the fruit of the spirit and the spirit of christ.

There is no “spirit of homosexuality”, any more than there’s a spirit of “liking cheese”.

You simply refuse to understand that, to those like myself anyway, “homosexuality”, as an attraction, is the natural draw a person feels for another person (who happens to be the same gender) taken to an extreme degree, where the attractee has conninced themself (helped by “society”) that it would feel REALLY GOOD to perform sexual acts with them.

Just as one can make a “maniacal obsession” of hunting down and eating rare cheeses, one can do precisely the same thing with one’s “homosexually” misinterpreted urges.

knowing our battle is not against flesh and blood, but powers and principalities. if you believe paul in romans 1:26-27, is referring to homosexuals, you have to say shame based lust. that is what you may believe. but is that what you have witnessed?

Since I’m not a “homosexual”, I can’t tell WHAT I witness from the behavior of “homosexuals”.

The point is not that being “homosexual” is a “shame based lust”, or sin, which it ISN’T,… but whether “homosexual sex acts” are, of necessity, disordered behavior, which they clearly are, as per the Magisterium.

without witness all you have is unsubstantiated belief.

Hopefully, you’re coming to a better understanding of why “we” believe as we do, and why you believe as you do.

Our “witness” is that “homosexual sex acts” are disordered, as learned from the observations of the authority on these type of matters.

Your “unsubstantiated belief”, in my opinion, as any opinion regarding faith and morals contrary to the Magisterium is unsubstantiated as the Magisterium is the ONLY authority on such matters, is that “homosexual sex acts” are not a sin.

We shall probably have to agree to disagree on that.

what is it you saw when you have fellowshipped with homosexual believers?

If by “fellowshipped” you mean “talked with”, “prayed with”, “worked with”, “had fun with as friends and relatives”, then I’d say that I saw them as normal people, as far as I could tell, just like with anyone, who, if they were “out”, I regarded as having an incorrect interpretation and response to one of their appetites.

so far no one has answered them.

Is that clear enough for you?

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

 

[blessedtoo]

so far no one has answered them.

We have answered them. You just don’t like the answers. There is no “spirit” of homosexuality, just as there is no “spirit” of any sin that goes against God’s law. According to what I think is your “logic”, we should be able to change the rules based on what we “witness” in any given group of people. So, if I see a couple engaging in pre-marital sex and they appear happy, does that mean the law of God should be suspended? How about a woman who aborts her child but doesn’t feel guilt? That okay? I am “witnessing” what “appears” to be good fruit, right? She’s happy, the fornicating couple are happy, the homosexuals are happy. What’s the problem? Your whole approach smacks of total moral relativism.