Is being anti homosexual anti christian?

[feetxxxl]

Of course. You can’t seriously believe otherwise. Most of us think this whole thread is too narrow. We think contraception, masturbation, fornication and adultery all belong on the same page with homosexual acts.

Serious question: is English your native language? I do not have the least idea what this sentence means. And I am not being obtuse or “difficult”.

Good. We can leave all of that out of future discussions. Promiscuity is off the table for this discussion. There was a whole sub-culture in the 70s that espoused “open marriage”, though. That was a fancy word for sleeping with people other than your spouse. When does adultery become promiscuity? For Christians, it’s ALL off the table./QUOTE)

it will be off the table if you start differentiating homosexual believers from homosexual non believers, as you do with heterosexuals.

the church, the bride of christ, the body of believers, whether homosexual or heterosexual lift up and worship christ. either in the same physical group or in seperate physical groups…regardless, of the when, where, and how, spiritually, they are doing it together.

 

[mercygate]

the church, the bride of christ, the body of believers, whether homosexual or heterosexual lift up and worship christ. either in the same physical group or in seperate physical groups…regardless, of the when, where, and how, spiritually, they are doing it together.

That’s great ecclesiology.

But a “believer” believes what the Church teaches, as she is the instrument designated by our Lord to “teach all nations.” Someone who “believes” but does not believe is fooling around. He may be sincere but he is like those people in John 6 who walked away because “this is a hard saying.”

It IS hard. The Cross is hard. The yoke is easy and the burden is light only for those who completely abandon themselves to the grace of God.

 

[feetxxxl]

That’s great ecclesiology.

But a “believer” believes what the Church teaches, as she is the instrument designated by our Lord to “teach all nations.” Someone who “believes” but does not believe is fooling around. He may be sincere but he is like those people in John 6 who walked away because “this is a hard saying.”

It IS hard. The Cross is hard. The yoke is easy and the burden is light only for those who completely abandon themselves to the grace of God.

matt 11:29Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30For my yoke is easy and my burden is light."

if jesus says his burden is light, how do you validate your heavy burden with the law, which paul says we are not under and cannot receive god’s righteousness by following.

paul says we have a new relationship with the spirit. but you provide no spirit witness or test.

 

[mercygate]

matt 11:29Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30For my yoke is easy and my burden is light."

if jesus says his burden is light, how do you validate your heavy burden.

As I wrote: The yoke is easy and the burden is light when we accept Christ with simple trust. The “heaviness” comes as a result of our own willful rejection of his truth. It is our own sins that weigh us down, our own self-will. It seems as if you are saying that we can follow Jesus and still follow our own rules. That rich young man refused to do what Jesus asked of him and went away sorrowing: that is, with a HEAVY heart.

 

[feetxxxl]

As I wrote: The yoke is easy and the burden is light when we accept Christ with simple trust. The “heaviness” comes as a result of our own willful rejection of his truth. It is our own sins that weigh us down, our own self-will. It seems as if you are saying that we can follow Jesus and still follow our own rules. That rich young man refused to do what Jesus asked of him and went away sorrowing: that is, with a HEAVY heart.

if jesus says his burden is light, how do you validate your heavy burden with the law, which paul says we are not under and cannot receive god’s righteousness by following.

paul says we have a new relationship with the spirit. but you provide no spirit witness or test.

 

[estesbob]

Do you put homosexuality in the same category with cannibalism? If so, I question your value system.:crying:

Nice try to try and chage the subject You know exzactly what I was refering to -a claim that if animals do it it is ok.

 

[gardenswithkids]

…in regards to your answer, your issue is that using contraceptives is trying to subvert god’s intent of conception.( personnally i believe that no one or nothing can subvert god’s will…my youngest brother being conceived in spite of the fact that my mother religously used a diaphram.) that you are trying to be god. but couldn’t that same motive be said of the intent of the rythym method. …

It becomes clearer from you relating your “mother religously used a diaphragm”that this issue attempting to separate sex from reproduction goes back further in your family. Interestingly, you use the word “religious” in connection with contraception.

Yet the story that your brother came into existence despite you mom using a diaphragm points to why I wrote that the spirit of contraception is related to the spirit of homosexuality because it is not entirely the same spirit. With heterosexual acts, God can use natural means to bypass the barrier to create a human soul. (Notice, the word “barrier” specifically relates to the classification of contraception that includes diaphragms.) Your brother’s very tiny feet formed in you mom’s womb in spite of that barrier. God forms no tiny feet (or the rest of the human–body and soul) through homosexual acts.

As to your claim that contraception is the same as natural methods, (you wrote rhythm, but there are other methods too), the difference is with natural methods the sexual act is not performed verses sexual acts performed with barriers and such. And a little mentioned Catholic Church teaching is that natural methods of birth regulation are not always moral either if the couple doesn’t have a valid reason for avoiding pregnancy and/or children.

Rather than pursuing this area of the topic of this thread, I encourage you to search old threads or start a new one. Perhaps the point of sex for reproduction would be easier for you to see if it didn’t hit so close to your home.

 

[blessedtoo]

are you as disgusted with promiscuity of those couples as you are with homosexual promiscuity.

Yup. You asked for “witness” of shame based lust among active homosexuals. I provided it.

i know of no homosexual or heterosexual believer who believes sexual promiscuity is of christ.

You must have very limited experience with the homosexual community. Regardless, those who justify homosexual activity, which is clearly not of Christ (as per all the Scriptures, traditions, testimonies etc., provided for you) have absolutely no reason to conform their consciences to any other moral law.

it will be off the table if you start differentiating homosexual believers from homosexual non believers, as you do with heterosexuals.

Ok. Homosexual believers are those who accept Church teaching and tradition regarding thier position in life, just as heterosexuals. You will find many, many testimonies right here on CAF (if you bothered to look) from wonderful, faithful SSA believers in Christ and they are not only welcomed within the Church, but held up as examples of how we should all carry the cross.

You have such a seriously twisted notion of Scripture (your own interpretation) that I don’t see how we shall ever find common ground. Even this statement of yours:

if jesus says his burden is light, how do you validate your heavy burden with the law, which paul says we are not under and cannot receive god’s righteousness by following.

is such a blatant misunderstanding of Paul’s words that I don’t think even the Episcopol Church would interpret it as you have.

 

[gardenswithkids]

it is becoming apparent, because of the difficulty that people are having answering my three questions, that romans, the book that was responsible for inditing homosexuality a sin…

Feet,
It apparent to me that you have difficulty understanding the book of Romans is not the only reason Christians look upon homosexual sex acts as sinful. You pretty much ignore many things from Genesis through Revelation. Genesis: “God made them male and female in His image and said ‘Go forth and multiply”. Revelation contains the marriage imagery, which you sighted and which we find throughout the Bible. Again, it’s not “Christ and Christ” or “the Church and the Church”, but Christ and the Church. Different not the same, but the Church (the bride) become one with Christ, the Bridegoom, and “Happy are those who are invited to the wedding-supper of the Lamb.” Rev. 19:9

Besides the marriage imagery, many Bible stories contain imagery of water and thirst. Jesus uses that in His encounter with the Samaritan woman at the well who had five husbands and who lived with a man who was not her husband. You sighted from that when you wrote of worshipping in spirit and truth. We see it again at the end of the Bible. Revelation 22: 17 “’Come!’ say the Spirit and the bride. ‘Come!’ let each hearer reply. Come forward, you who are thirsty; accept the* water of life, a fee gift to all who desire it.”*

A phrase from a song keeps entering my mind regarding this thread, **“Everyone talks about his drinking, but not about his thirst.” **You wrote about your “thirst” here:

…homosexuality is about people who have a mutual, attraction, respect, and love for each other, who are involved in human bonding. two people becoming one flesh. human bonding carries the understanding that the sum is greater than the individual parts. that two people committed to each other is greater than two people living seperate lives. …

The longing to bond is a longing deep within all of us—it’s not unique to homosexuals. Our fallen human condition feels isolated at times, and we long to connect with another. That longing is a holy desire: God is the Another for Whom we really long. Anyone short of God will let us down and leave us unsatisfied. If sexual encounters truly satisfied our human long to bond, no one would feel compelled to have more than one sexual encounter. But we continue to seek sexual encounters because we are not filled. Humans can’t fill us with what truly long for. As St. Augustine said, we have a God shaped hole inside of us. Only God can fill us. He is the Living Water and only God can satisfy our thirst.

 

[mercygate]

if jesus says his burden is light, how do you validate your heavy burden with the law, which paul says we are not under and cannot receive god’s righteousness by following.

paul says we have a new relationship with the spirit. but you provide no spirit witness or test.

Paul does not say we are not under ANY law. The law he is referring to is the Mosaic law. He outlines in detail the war of his flesh against the “law of God” which he ‘delights in in his inmost self.’

Help me understand what a “spirit witness or test” would be in your eyes. Put yourself on my side of the issue and construct a response that would meet your criteria. I am using Scripture and natural law. Underlying that, you may be assured, is my conversion to the Word in Christ.

We are not allowed to ask for personal information on these forums. Do I correctly guess that you are under 20?

 

[feetxxxl]

It becomes clearer from you relating your “mother religously used a diaphragm”that this issue attempting to separate sex from reproduction goes back further in your family. Interestingly, you use the word “religious” in connection with contraception.

Yet the story that your brother came into existence despite you mom using a diaphragm points to why I wrote that the spirit of contraception is related to the spirit of homosexuality because it is not entirely the same spirit. With heterosexual acts, God can use natural means to bypass the barrier to create a human soul. (Notice, the word “barrier” specifically relates to the classification of contraception that includes diaphragms.) Your brother’s very tiny feet formed in you mom’s womb in spite of that barrier. God forms no tiny feet (or the rest of the human–body and soul) through homosexual acts.

As to your claim that contraception is the same as natural methods, (you wrote rhythm, but there are other methods too), the difference is with natural methods the sexual act is not performed verses sexual acts performed with barriers and such. And a little mentioned Catholic Church teaching is that natural methods of birth regulation are not always moral either if the couple doesn’t have a valid reason for avoiding pregnancy and/or children.

Rather than pursuing this area of the topic of this thread, I encourage you to search old threads or start a new one. Perhaps the point of sex for reproduction would be easier for you to see if it didn’t hit so close to your home.

i discussed all the biblical references to same sex relations, at the onset of this discussion, on the first page.

 

[feetxxxl]

Feet,
It apparent to me that you have difficulty understanding the book of Romans is not the only reason Christians look upon homosexual sex acts as sinful. You pretty much ignore many things from Genesis through Revelation. Genesis: “God made them male and female in His image and said ‘Go forth and multiply”. Revelation contains the marriage imagery, which you sighted and which we find throughout the Bible. Again, it’s not “Christ and Christ” or “the Church and the Church”, but Christ and the Church. Different not the same, but the Church (the bride) become one with Christ, the Bridegoom, and “Happy are those who are invited to the wedding-supper of the Lamb.” Rev. 19:9

Besides the marriage imagery, many Bible stories contain imagery of water and thirst. Jesus uses that in His encounter with the Samaritan woman at the well who had five husbands and who lived with a man who was not her husband. You sighted from that when you wrote of worshipping in spirit and truth. We see it again at the end of the Bible. Revelation 22: 17 “’Come!’ say the Spirit and the bride. ‘Come!’ let each hearer reply. Come forward, you who are thirsty; accept the* water of life, a fee gift to all who desire it.”*

A phrase from a song keeps entering my mind regarding this thread, **“Everyone talks about his drinking, but not about his thirst.” **You wrote about your “thirst” here:
The longing to bond is a longing deep within all of us—it’s not unique to homosexuals. Our fallen human condition feels isolated at times, and we long to connect with another. That longing is a holy desire: God is the Another for Whom we really long. Anyone short of God will let us down and leave us unsatisfied. If sexual encounters truly satisfied our human long to bond, no one would feel compelled to have more than one sexual encounter. But we continue to seek sexual encounters because we are not filled. Humans can’t fill us with what truly long for. As St. Augustine said, we have a God shaped hole inside of us. Only God can fill us. He is the Living Water and only God can satisfy our thirst.

i discussed all the biblical references to same sex relations, at the onset of this discussion, on the first page.

 

[blessedtoo]

These are just your opinions. Perhaps there are certain aspects of your lifestyle and character that others would consider ‘disgusting perversions’. Or, are you ***perfect? ***Just so say, and I’ll believe you.

Sorry. This is not personal opinion. The biological complementarity, the evolutionary imperative, the natural law all indicate that deviation from the purpose (to propogate the species) of heterosexual intercourse is a perversion. When the natural objective of a thing is thwarted, it is by definition, a “perversion” of it’s purpose. Oh, and BTW: Jesus did tell us to strive to be perfect, as our heavenly Father is perfect.

If it’s unhappy, which it isn’t, it would be because of age-old, societal persecution.

What a load. Perhaps you should peruse the forums on this topic to read testimonies from those with SSA who have blessedly escaped their former lifestyles. Folks who live their lives firmly entrenched in sin are obviously not going to acknowledge there may be a problem. Besides, as Catholics, it is not temporal happiness we strive for. It is eternal life. If we are blessed here in this world with the joy of Christ, than all the better. But to aim for happiness is a pretty superficial goal for the Catholic. We are not the village idiots, you know.
Persecution? Hmmm, based on my observation, it’s quite the opposite. Try celebration. How do you think the gay activists have been so successful in persuading folks that a once universally accepted abnormal behavior is now just okey-dokey?

Then why did God create homosexuality? Why did He reason, “I’ll create it in animals, and consider that okay. But in humans, it will be a horrific sin for which I will punish those who indulge it.”? Is God irrational? I don’t think so.

Lord. Do you know the story of the Fall? Are you aware that God, in His infinite wisdom, created man without blemish and that through man’s disobedience, disorder entered our world? Do you understand that we are all subject to this disordered nature, including nature? Perhaps you should do a bit of reading on Sacred Scripture and Tradition and how the Catholic Church understands that all of nature has been corrupted by man’s disobedience. This would include the animal kingdon. Do you not think that homosexuality in animals is considered a perversion of the natural order? How can anything that thwarts the biological purpose not be considered an anamoly? Besides, you keep dragging the animals into this and it’s irrelevent, unless of course you agree with Peter Singer that we are no better than the animals. But as a self-proclaimed Catholic, you should understand that we were created in God’s image, given an eternal soul, free will, and reason. My kitty hasn’t displayed any of these attributes in her 20 years of existence.

And you speak violence in the name of your decency and goodnes.

Ignorance of the truth is violence. Truth never clashes with goodness.

Yeah, Paul, who ‘needed’ his young ***male ***companions so desperately, all the time.

Your assertion is dispicable.

 

[feetxxxl]

Paul does not say we are not under ANY law. The law he is referring to is the Mosaic law. He outlines in detail the war of his flesh against the “law of God” which he ‘delights in in his inmost self.’

Help me understand what a “spirit witness or test” would be in your eyes. Put yourself on my side of the issue and construct a response that would meet your criteria. I am using Scripture and natural law. Underlying that, you may be assured, is my conversion to the Word in Christ.

We are not allowed to ask for personal information on these forums. Do I correctly guess that you are under 20?

do you know one gay couple so that you can say you have fellowshipped with them in the spirit of christ.and in the name of that spirit of fellowship are you able to witness that the reason for their human bonding is because of the “shame based lust” mentioned in romans 1. that is your witness.

 

[blessedtoo]

do you know one gay couple so that you can say you have fellowshipped with them in the spirit of christ.and in the name of that spirit of fellowship are you able to witness that the reason for their human bonding is because of the “shame based lust” mentioned in romans 1. that is your witness.

What you are looking for is irrelevent. You are completely misunderstanding the Scripture. Homosexual acts, by their very nature, are “shame based lust” because they are not procreative. Why can’t you get that? And you keep repeating the same passage and conveniently ignoring the other, more explicit prohibitions:
**

Romans 1:27 and 32

“and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity.”

“Although they know the just decree of God that all who practice such things deserve death, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.”

1 Cor 6:9
“Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes nor sodomites”

1 Tim 1:9-10
“We know that the law is good, provided that one uses it as law,
with the understanding that law is meant not for a righteous person but for the lawless and unruly, the godless and sinful, the unholy and profane, those who kill their fathers or mothers, murderers, the unchaste, practicing homosexuals, kidnappers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is opposed to sound teaching,”**

It doesn’t matter what you think or I think about how homosexuals behave in their relationships. The very nature of the behavior is opposed to God’s law. It’s just that simple.

 

[feetxxxl]

What you are looking for is irrelevent. You are completely misunderstanding the Scripture. Homosexual acts, by their very nature, are “shame based lust” because they are not procreative. Why can’t you get that? And you keep repeating the same passage and conveniently ignoring the other, more explicit prohibitions:

---

It doesn’t matter what you think or I think about how homosexuals behave in their relationships. The very nature of the behavior is opposed to God’s law. It’s just that simple.

you are merely giving an opinion that is unsubstabniated by witness…is it your underdstanding that the epistles are without witness…my understanding is that they are essence of witness. as are the gopels and revelation.

it is my understanding that as believers, aside from what we believe or understand…we are also required to acknowledge what we witness(see) thru our hearts(the place where christs lives with the father) in the spirit of fellowship.

 

[feetxxxl]

What you are looking for is irrelevent. You are completely misunderstanding the Scripture. Homosexual acts, by their very nature, are “shame based lust” because they are not procreative. Why can’t you get that? And you keep repeating the same passage and conveniently ignoring the other, more explicit prohibitions:

---

It doesn’t matter what you think or I think about how homosexuals behave in their relationships. The very nature of the behavior is opposed to God’s law. It’s just that simple.

the burden you are standing on, is according to your interpretation of the law…all things written, including the law, requiring interpretation. and you are allowing this interpretaion to be everything and your witness to be nothing…which would be to dismiss romans1:20

 

[mercygate]

do you know one gay couple so that you can say you have fellowshipped with them in the spirit of christ.and in the name of that spirit of fellowship are you able to witness that the reason for their human bonding is because of the “shame based lust” mentioned in romans 1. that is your witness.

Good grief! I went to an Episcopal seminary. Gay is our middle name. I know gay “couples” and I know Episcopal priests with SSA living in continence and chastity, who don’t come “out” for fear of being hounded by the gay community that holds chastity in contempt. I work with a man (one of the kindest people I know), who brokered ova, which he and his long-time “partner” fertilized and had implanted in a surrogate mother to produce their boy and girl twins. I have held the hand of a gay friend dying of AIDS, and of a gay colleague who tried to kill himself over an affair gone wrong. So my witness has little to do with ignorance of gay people. I have known “good 'uns and bad 'uns” – pretty much like everybody else.

I never brought up shame based lust. You did. The matter is far more complex than that.

The idea that the only suffering among gay couples is caused by persecution from straight folks is so naive as to be ridiculous. You ought to see what comes into the Police Station and the emergency rooms down in Greenwich Village on a Saturday night.

 

[blessedtoo]

you are merely giving an opinion that is unsubstabniated by witness…is it your underdstanding that the epistles are without witness…my understanding is that they are essence of witness. as are the gopels and revelation.

it is my understanding that as believers, aside from what we believe or understand…we are also required to acknowledge what we witness(see) thru our hearts(the place where christs lives with the father) in the spirit of fellowship.

As I said:

It doesn’t matter what you think or I think about how homosexuals behave in their relationships. The very nature of the behavior is opposed to God’s law. It’s just that simple.

Not my opinion. The law is clear. The Scriptures are clear. We have given our personal “witness” (whatever that means to you). You have convoluted the Scripture, Tradition, the facts, the requested “witness” and just about everything else regarding this issue. You are not interested in dialogue, clearly. I’m done. Good luck.

 

[feetxxxl]

Good grief! I went to an Episcopal seminary. Gay is our middle name. I know gay “couples” and I know Episcopal priests with SSA living in continence and chastity, who don’t come “out” for fear of being hounded by the gay community that holds chastity in contempt. I work with a man (one of the kindest people I know), who brokered ova, which he and his long-time “partner” fertilized and had implanted in a surrogate mother to produce their boy and girl twins. I have held the hand of a gay friend dying of AIDS, and of a gay colleague who tried to kill himself over an affair gone wrong. So my witness has little to do with ignorance of gay people. I have known “good 'uns and bad 'uns” – pretty much like everybody else.

I never brought up shame based lust. You did. The matter is far more complex than that.

The idea that the only suffering among gay couples is caused by persecution from straight folks is so naive as to be ridiculous. You ought to see what comes into the Police Station and the emergency rooms down in Greenwich Village on a Saturday night.

i brought it up because romans 1:26-27 brought it up…truly you do have a witness…but im not clear on how it correlates to the shame based lust ridden relationships of romans1. but that is merely my interpretation. what is your understanding of romans 1:26-27.