Refusing to Believe Homosexual Acts Are Wrong

[LaSainte]

She is correct. There is no verse in scripture that states homosexual acts are “sinful” There ARE verses that state engaging in homosexual acts that are part of pagan religious practices are either an “abomination” as in Leviticus…or as in Romans chapter 1 which deal with temple prostitution…or in 1Cor that deal with pedarstry…but scripture does not condemn nor address any understanding of human sexuality as “we” have come to understand it. Trying to convince her that the views of your church on the subject are “correct” and her’s are “wrong” is a rough row to hoe.

I sort of disagree with this. No, Jesus Himself did not, in a single sentence, condemn homosexual activity. But, He was asked about divorce, at which point He proceeds to very specifically DEFINE what marriage is:

He answered, “Have you not read that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, `For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder.”

So we know that gay marriage is out of the question based on Jesus’ own words.

Now, since two men or women CLEARLY cannot be married, can they still sleep together? Well the Bible condemns fornication in no uncertain terms many, many times. Fornication is sex with anyone who is not your marriage partner. Paul condemns fornication, as does Christ Himself in Revelation several times.

It is clear that sex outside of marriage is condemned, and that marriage is only between a man and a woman.

Tell her she needs to read the whole Bible and put t together. You can’t just say “Well Jesus never said you can’t have gay sex” and use that as an argument. Jesus also never said abortion is wrong and he also never said that parents can’t molest their children. Are those things ok then?

 

[CopticChristian]

Since we are discussing why a Protestant friend of a Catholic cannot “believe” homossexuality is wrong, I have provided one of the possible answers.

Even the word “sodomy” is a construct and is used no where in scripture…if I remember correctly, in some of the older English translations the word “sodomy” is used where 'male prostitute" is used in more modern translations. If I remembeer correctly it was a term “coined” by Jerome when the scriptures were translated in Latin…the “Vulgate”.

While homosexuality was know and it was not called “sodomy” until the 4th century nor called “h9mossexuality” until the late 19th or early 20th centuery if memory serves me correctly, “sodomy” is an inaccurate term. “Male prostitute” is more correct…and since the understanding of homosexuality has understood today has no “counterpart” in 1100 BCE…100 CE…or even 400CE…neither was the complexities of human sexuality, disease or cosmology.

The Levitical law calls “bats” birds" because they flew…but we know today “bats” are not “birds.”

Perfect,

Friend, you understand…while we know that bats and birds both fly that does not create in our minds any controversy knowing that descriptors are not the issue…we know that abominable acts are abominable acts and are condemned…

in the year 100 AD…

Two men, joined by their reproductive part and the end of the alimentary tract…are no
different than

those two men in the year 2013

so when we read what Paul says about Lust, turning passions over to the creation, abandoning natural function, lies and the lack of worth of these acts…the word sodomy and homosexual do not come into play but what they do can be imagined…and…

24Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. 25For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

26For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27and in the same way also the **men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. **

28And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; [they are] gossips, 30slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; 32and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.

I would tell any Protestant that Homosexuality is wrong, they do not walk in the light and anyone that believes that they do may be diminishing their own light…becase we cannot give approval, as Paul says to those that practice these wrong things…

 

[Publisher]

And you are well within your religious right to do so…but thankfully you are not the one who will be standing with me at that Last Day.

I might get a lot of things wrong…but I’d rather err on the side of love and mercy. I do not believe in an “infallible” interpreter of scripture in this world…so I must rely on how I understand scripture and how it impacts my life. I am responsible for my self and how I ‘work out my own salvation’…I am responsible for my actions and whom I consider my neighbor and how I treat the “stranger with in my gates”.

 

[Publisher]

Gosh, there’s a bigger issue here than the morality of homosexual activity!

So you believe the Exodus story is based on a myth?

And Jesus, did he actually perform miracles, or was it all stage-acting or make-believe?

Ummm modernity in its core is long gone, Publisher. As for replacing “magic” and “miracles” (as if the two are alike - you should read what C.S. Lewis has to say on the matter), how does science explain Lourdes or Fatima or Lanciano or Guadeloupe?

Yes, the Exodus story is myth. The gospels are not biographical memoirs of the life of Jesus of Nazareth, but a “retelling” of OT stories with Jesus as the chief character instead of Moses, Joshua, Elijah, Elisha etc…the gospels were liturgical writings to be incorporated into the Jewish liturgical year and read alongside those passages read in the synagouge during the Jewish year.

Humans want to ascribe “mystical” explanations to many phenomanah…if your belief in Fatima, Lourdes, Luancian and Guadeloupe reinforce your faith in God, wonderful…such stories do not do so for me.

 

[steve_b]

And you are well within your religious right to do so…but thankfully you are not the one who will be standing with me at that Last Day.

I might get a lot of things wrong…but I’d rather err on the side of love and mercy. I do not believe in an “infallible” interpreter of scripture in this world…so I must rely on how I understand scripture and how it impacts my life. I am responsible for my self and how I ‘work out my own salvation’…I am responsible for my actions and whom I consider my neighbor and how I treat the “stranger with in my gates”.

As Jesus said, “if you love me keep my commandments”[Jn 14:15]

That’s a conditional statement. It’s no sappy sentamentality but an instruction that must be put into action.

Since Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to be with the apostles, the HS then will cause the apostles to remember and teach all that Jesus taught. John 14:25-26 John 16:12-15

Therefore when Paul wrote the following, bottomline, it came from Jesus. And no one is more loving and merciful than Jesus

• 1 Corinthians 6: 9 - 10 no sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor male prostitutes, nor homosexual offenders** ,****ἀρσενοκοίτης*****arsenokoitēs]***10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor slanderers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.

ἀρσενοκοίτης arsenokoitēs

Definition

one who lies with a male as with a female, sodomite, homosexual

 

[Slavonic]

Today we call it Homosexuality, Sodomy…

So regardless of what we called it, regardless of the words used, what was, was…and what is, is…

Sodomy is not Homosexuality. Homosexuality is not sodomy. You’re confusing sex acts and sexual orientation, which clouds the discussion. The word homosexuality itself is an antiquated term applied to Gay and Lesbian individuals, so it’s inappropriate for any contemporary discussions of sexuality and sexual morality.

• 1 Corinthians 6: 9 - 10 no sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor male prostitutes, nor homosexual offenders** ,****ἀρσενοκοίτης*****arsenokoitēs]***10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor slanderers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.

ἀρσενοκοίτης arsenokoitēs

Definition

one who lies with a male as with a female, sodomite, homosexual

The fact of the matter is we don’t know the meaning of that word. For this reason, we can’t really know what Paul meant by it at all and any interpretations of any kind based on that word are groundless.

 

[livingwordunity]

Sodomy is not Homosexuality. Homosexuality is not sodomy. You’re confusing sex acts and sexual orientation, which clouds the discussion. The word homosexuality itself is an antiquated term applied to Gay and Lesbian individuals, so it’s inappropriate for any contemporary discussions of sexuality and sexual morality.

The fact of the matter is we don’t know the meaning of that word. For this reason, we can’t really know what Paul meant by it at all and any interpretations of any kind based on that word are groundless.

But according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. 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.

Outside of the Catholic Church is a sea of confusion where no one can know objective truth anymore. But Catholics who know that the Church speaks infallibly as the voice of God to us can know that homosexual acts are clearly condemned by Saint Paul in Sacred Scripture since the Church said so in the Catechism of the Catholic Church which Pope John Paul II said is a sure norm for instructing in the faith.

 

[CopticChristian]

.

Sodomy is not Homosexuality. Homosexuality is not sodomy. You’re confusing sex acts and sexual orientation, which clouds the discussion. The word homosexuality itself is an antiquated term applied to Gay and Lesbian individuals, so it’s inappropriate for any contemporary discussions of sexuality and sexual morality.

Well then tell me what it is you would like to call this when two men unite via their reproductive and alimentary tracts?

Next is it immoral?

Next is is sinful?

The fact of the matter is we don’t know the meaning of that word. For this reason, we can’t really know what Paul meant by it at all and any interpretations of any kind based on that word are groundless

Wow. We don’t know! We can’t know! On the other hand the Church says that what Paul says in Romans is consistent with what we call Homosexuality…

What is it you believe it to be from your Catholic perspective?

Are two men united by their genital and end of the alimentary tract meanigful to you? Is it normal? Is it sinful? Is it immoral?

 

[buffalo]

Yes, the Exodus story is myth.

Source?

 

[Slavonic]

But according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church:Outside of the Catholic Church is a sea of confusion where no one can know objective truth anymore. But Catholics who know that the Church speaks infallibly as the voice of God to us can know that homosexual acts are clearly condemned by Saint Paul in Sacred Scripture since the Church said so in the Catechism of the Catholic Church which Pope John Paul II said is a sure norm for instructing in the faith.

Wow. We don’t know! We can’t know! On the other hand the Church says that what Paul says in Romans is consistent with what we call Homosexuality…

What is it you believe it to be from your Catholic perspective?

The Church can use Scripture, just not that phase. There are others.

Well then tell me what it is you would like to call this when two men unite via their reproductive and alimentary tracts?

Next is it immoral?

Next is is sinful?

You know, I went to the Catechism and had trouble finding anything. And my google search referred me to the passages on homosexuality. But sodomy is in the domain of gay and straight alike. That, perhaps, is my issue, why separate these sins? Why make generalizations about one orientation and not the other? Can we discuss sex acts absent sexual orientation? If so, please, Coptic…catechize me!

 

[Publisher]

As Jesus said, “if you love me keep my commandments”[Jn 14:15]

That’s a conditional statement. It’s no sappy sentamentality but an instruction that must be put into action.

Since Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to be with the apostles, the HS then will cause the apostles to remember and teach all that Jesus taught. John 14:25-26 John 16:12-15

Therefore when Paul wrote the following, bottomline, it came from Jesus. And no one is more loving and merciful than Jesus

So tell me…must I “obey” Jesus the way you feel he should be obeyed or how I believe he must be obeyed?

“Love the Lord your God…and your neighbor as yourself…this is the law and the prophets”

One Day it is I and I alone that must stand before Him…and I can do so, not becasue of what I have done…but because what He has done for me. He is Hope itself…it is not required of me that “you” accept me as a brother in Christ…it is required of me that I accept you as one. That’s the difference for me…I cannot “make” anyone accept me…but it is a choice I must make…and I’m ok with that…I am in Good Hands…like Job stated…"Though He slay me, still will I trust in Him.’

• 1 Corinthians 6: 9 - 10 no sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor male prostitutes, nor homosexual offenders** ,****ἀρσενοκοίτης*****arsenokoitēs]***10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor slanderers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.

ἀρσενοκοίτης arsenokoitēs

Definition

one who lies with a male as with a female, sodomite, homosexual

 

[Publisher]

As Jesus said, “if you love me keep my commandments”[Jn 14:15]

That’s a conditional statement. It’s no sappy sentamentality but an instruction that must be put into action.

Since Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to be with the apostles, the HS then will cause the apostles to remember and teach all that Jesus taught. John 14:25-26 John 16:12-15

Therefore when Paul wrote the following, bottomline, it came from Jesus. And no one is more loving and merciful than Jesus

• 1 Corinthians 6: 9 - 10 no sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor male prostitutes, nor homosexual offenders** ,****ἀρσενοκοίτης*****arsenokoitēs]***10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor slanderers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.

ἀρσενοκοίτης arsenokoitēs

Definition

one who lies with a male as with a female, sodomite, homosexual

One Day it is I and I alone that must stand before Him…and I can do so, not becasue of what I have done…but because what He has done for me. He is Hope itself…it is not required of me that “you” accept me as a brother in Christ…it is required of me that I accept you as one. That’s the difference for me…I cannot “make” anyone accept me…but it is a choice I must make…and I’m ok with that…I am in Good Hands…like Job stated…"Though He slay me, still will I trust in Him.’

 

[livingwordunity]

The Church can use Scripture, just not that phase. There are others.

You know, I went to the Catechism and had trouble finding anything. And my google search referred me to the passages on homosexuality. But sodomy is in the domain of gay and straight alike. That, perhaps, is my issue, why separate these sins? Why make generalizations about one orientation and not the other? Can we discuss sex acts absent sexual orientation? If so, please, Coptic…catechize me!

My mom used to say that if a man prefers anal with a woman it’s probably because he’s a closet homosexual or bisexual. Anal sex is only common among heterosexuals in pornos and those who want to try it once out of curiosity because they saw people doing it in a porno, but anal sex is not mainstream for the average hetero couple as it is for homosexual men. I think the reason is that with a woman a man has a better option.

 

[CopticChristian]

The Church can use Scripture, just not that phase. There are others.

You know, I went to the Catechism and had trouble finding anything. And my google search referred me to the passages on homosexuality. But sodomy is in the domain of gay and straight alike. That, perhaps, is my issue, why separate these sins? Why make generalizations about one orientation and not the other? Can we discuss sex acts absent sexual orientation? If so, please, Coptic…catechize me!

Let’s start at the very beginning…a very good place to start…now you want and asked for catechesis…I pray you respect and understand my teaching style…

Sodomy is not Homosexuality. Homosexuality is not sodomy. You’re confusing sex acts and sexual orientation, which clouds the discussion. The word homosexuality itself is an antiquated term applied to Gay and Lesbian individuals, so it’s inappropriate for any contemporary discussions of sexuality and sexual morality.

If Sodomy is not homosexuality and homosexuality is not sodomy then tell me…

what is it you believe Sodomy to be?
what is it you believe Homosexuality to be?

I am not confused. I am not in any way speaking of SSA only actions so there is no cloud. I speak only of sex acts. Now that is settled lets continue.

If the word homosexuality is antiquated as you say and is innapropriate to discuss sexuality and morality…how can I be of service in catechizing you and in that regard supply a term that conveys the following

Unnatural, sinful and Immoral acts between two people of the same gender…what word would you like to use?

The fact of the matter is we don’t know the meaning of that word. For this reason, we can’t really know what Paul meant by it at all and any interpretations of any kind based on that word are groundless

The fact is that you believe that “we” whoever we is do not know the meaning of a word. Is it possible you have not defined this word and the word Homosexuality has no meaning to you? This is always possible that there is someone that has no understanding of a word and in that regard I wait for the word that describes…

Unnatural, sinful and Immoral acts between two people of the same gender…what word would you like to use?

You believe that we cannot know what Paul meant by a ceratin word implicates that we cannot know other words and if that is true then the entire paradigm of Oral Tradtion and what we believe as revealed truths falls…certainly you are not saying this are you? You don’t believe that we Catholic, your monikor says Byzantine go around with a Bible/Concordance/Interlinear and Bible Dictionary trying to figure out what the Bible teaches…for don’t you know that the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth?

Ok, that is enough for now…after you provide me satisfactory answers…we shall continue…good enough…

 

[josh987654321]

And you are well within your religious right to do so…but thankfully you are not the one who will be standing with me at that Last Day.

I might get a lot of things wrong…but I’d rather err on the side of love and mercy. I do not believe in an “infallible” interpreter of scripture in this world…so I must rely on how I understand scripture and how it impacts my life. I am responsible for my self and how I ‘work out my own salvation’…I am responsible for my actions and whom I consider my neighbor and how I treat the “stranger with in my gates”.

I don’t think you understand what we are saying, we are saying in it’s most simplest terms “hate the sin, love the sinner” I think you are trying to say “the only way to love the sinner is to love the sin.”

Yes, the Exodus story is myth. The gospels are not biographical memoirs of the life of Jesus of Nazareth, but a “retelling” of OT stories with Jesus as the chief character instead of Moses, Joshua, Elijah, Elisha etc…the gospels were liturgical writings to be incorporated into the Jewish liturgical year and read alongside those passages read in the synagouge during the Jewish year.

Humans want to ascribe “mystical” explanations to many phenomanah…if your belief in Fatima, Lourdes, Luancian and Guadeloupe reinforce your faith in God, wonderful…such stories do not do so for me.

No. Exodus story is not a myth.

If you have time I very strongly recommend you watch this - The Exodus Decoded youtube.com/watch?v=a3mVe3DqVFY

It goes for a little over 1 hour, but it shows you how they used science to explain how the mircales in Exodus could have very easily actually happened.

One person on here claimed that “no city has ever been consumed by fire and brimestone” but little do you realise, this is how they explained it, infact in history many cities have been consumed by volcanos and to an uneducated mind that would definatly be fire and brimestone wouldn’t you think?

Also did you view the Stigmata on film linked in my previous post? it shows that these things can and do happen, it’s not just make believe.

It shows the phenomanah of stigmata on video, it also shows the phenomanah of a piece of bread we say is the Eucharist turning into literal flesh and blood over the course of a couple months, but hey if you think these are all freak phenomanah’s and have nothing to do with Christ or God, than so be it, given all of the information I think it’s prettly clear, but hey thats just me.

Thank you for reading
Josh

 

[livingwordunity]

Yes, the Exodus story is myth. The gospels are not biographical memoirs of the life of Jesus of Nazareth, but a “retelling” of OT stories with Jesus as the chief character instead of Moses, Joshua, Elijah, Elisha etc…the gospels were liturgical writings to be incorporated into the Jewish liturgical year and read alongside those passages read in the synagouge during the Jewish year.

Because you say so? Who put you in charge to say that all the Christians who came before you were wrong? I’ll trust the testimony of the ones who knew Jesus personally and were willing to die for the faith than to deny what they had witnessed. I’ll trust the Early Church fathers some of which were personally instructed by the apostles who knew Jesus first-hand.

 

[livingwordunity]

And…the obvious difficulty in interpreting that word “abomination” is…in Leviticus 11:12, God also said eating shellfish is an “abomination”.
"Whatsoever has no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you."
But we ignore that rule.

It says that eating shellfish was an abomination to us, not to God. It’s basically saying to the people, “you don’t like shellfish”.

But acts of homosexuality are an abomination to God.

Big difference.
.

 

[CopticChristian]

She is correct. There is no verse in scripture that states homosexual acts are “sinful”

There ARE verses that state engaging in homosexual acts that are part of pagan religious practices are either an “abomination” as in Leviticus…or as in Romans chapter 1 which deal with temple prostitution…or in 1Cor that deal with pedarstry…but scripture does not condemn nor address any understanding of human sexuality as “we” have come to understand it. Trying to convince her that the views of your church on the subject are “correct” and her’s are “wrong” is a rough row to hoe.

Here you say that in Leveticus the abomination is based on pagan religious practice. So if it is not actions that are pagan then that makes it not an abomination. You also say Romans deals with temple Prostitution and Corinthians deals with pedastry.

you then say…

I might get a lot of things wrong…but I’d rather err on the side of love and mercy.** I do not believe in an “infallible” interpreter of scripture in this world…so I must rely on how I understand scripture and how it impacts my life.** I am responsible for my self and how I ‘work out my own salvation’…I am responsible for my actions and whom I consider my neighbor and how I treat the "stranger with in my gates

Help me understand. You here say that you do not believe in an infallible interpretor of Scripture. Ok.

then

You must rely on how it impacts your life and you are responsible for yourself.

so

Help me understand how it is you came about the notion that Romans deals with temple prostitution based on Scripture alone?

 

[jonathan_hili]

Mike Willesee, a former outspoken athiest, and a very well known and respected Australian journalist went to extreme measures to try and prove that there was no such thing as miracles and that they were all a hoax, until he witnessed them for himself and ever since, is now a devout Catholic.

Yeah, we love Mike Willesee in Australia. He is a truly decent guy.

 

[jonathan_hili]

Yes, the Exodus story is myth. The gospels are not biographical memoirs of the life of Jesus of Nazareth, but a “retelling” of OT stories with Jesus as the chief character instead of Moses, Joshua, Elijah, Elisha etc…the gospels were liturgical writings to be incorporated into the Jewish liturgical year and read alongside those passages read in the synagouge during the Jewish year.

Humans want to ascribe “mystical” explanations to many phenomanah…if your belief in Fatima, Lourdes, Luancian and Guadeloupe reinforce your faith in God, wonderful…such stories do not do so for me.

Well, that’s a novel spin on things! How does that explain either the Crucifixion or the disciples preaching the Resurrection to their deaths? Don’t you believe in providence, and that God could so organise things so as to present Jesus as the fulfillment of the OT?

Stories? You really haven’t looked into them, have you? I’d suggest you do so before disregarding them as just “stories”.

So do Quakers believe in Jesus as God, in the Resurrection, in anything orthodox to Christianity? Are Quakers Christians?