Refusing to Believe Homosexual Acts Are Wrong

[josh987654321]

Justhad a letter from a gay christian who is not sexually active. It broke my heart for me to read how hurt he has been when particpating in conversations posted here. Seems, we should not be so concerned about winning debates on the topic…Maybe we should try to love others without judging, condeming, or trying to win theological arguments… It is much harder to love others than it is to debate them.
TimeEntrance;10658834:

Tell your friend I said I’m sure God and Jesus are not far from him.

It does not matter what my views of homosexuality are. Do I think they’re in general immoral? Yeah. But I think that of a lot of things including premarital heterosexual sex.

I’d take a blood transfusion from your friend just as I would from a bank robber or the street hooker. I’d have no problem drinking a beer with your friend either. And I can always use his prayers.

Theology, science, philosophy, and all intellectual things are good and have there place. Just like the law. But you can know all the theology and all the history in the world and still miss something crucial about being

that a small, mentally challenged girl might not. She may think of a the nun in habit–identify her as or with–the Virgin Mary. That is enough.

x2

I think your friend may have miss understood where alot of people are coming from, we are discussing the morality of homosexual intercourse and why we shouldn’t encourage homosexuals to act on their desires that they suffer from, as we all suffer from immoral or disordered desires homosexuals and heterosexuals that we must try and control and not support.

Homosexuals are called to chastity which is similar to celibacy, which is the exact same cross that I must also carry as an unmarried heterosexual.

I would be just as upset if people tried to claim that heterosexuals recklessly sleeping around with women (pre-marital sex) was moral and being encouraged.

Which is what they are doing with same sex marriage, they are taking something immoral and trying to call it moral, which I disagree with.

However there have been some insensitive comments on the issue, but the majority are in all sincerity trying to help.

Thank you for reading
Josh

 

[CopticChristian]

Is the text in “quote”, from another post in this thread, or is this a paraphrase or compilation of another person’s responses?

from an outside source researching what Quakers believe…

 

[CopticChristian]

No, I do not agree that scritpure states homosexual activity is wrong. Scripture states predatory homosexual actions are wrong. Scripture states religious prostitution which includes homosexual prostitutes is wrong. Scripture states older men may not exchange their patronage for sexual favors of younger men.

Leviticus was written to separate Israel from their pagan neighbors and pagan practices.

1 Corinthians deals with sexual practices of pedastry and prostitution.

Scripture does not address nor encompass a modern understanding of the complexities of science, psychology, human sexuality, cosmology, biology and reporduction in any way.

It’s concepts are rooted in an ancient system of beliefs which makes the earth the center of the universe so the sun “moves across the sky of a stationary earth”…the earth floats on the surface of a large flat sea. The earth has corners, which makes sense if one view the earth as a flat square surface where one can sail off the edge. The sky is where God dwells behind a canopy of blue…the stars are the lights from heaven. The moon produces it’s own light…NO ONE in ancient times understood the rotation of the earth, the reflectence of sunlight off the moon and it’s phases as it passed behind the earth.

The writers of scripture believed demons caused sickness and disease was God’s judgement on sinners.

The writers of scripture had a “magic” world view…read Tobit who receives instructions of making a magic substance.

Scripture gives us a glimpse of how our befores understood and experienced God.

What we know of human reproduction and human sexuality was unknown to ancient man. Marriage was concieved of the man paying a “bride price” to her father…ownership was transferred from the father to the husband.

Women were viewed as imperfect “men”

Read carefully the first chapters of Genesis…Adam was presented the creatures of the earth to choose a “helpmate”…but found none that pleased him, so God formed woman from Adam’s rib…women were an after thought.

Scripture is not a science, psychology, history or text book…it is a set of religious writings of ancient man as they tried to understand the world around them.

Snakes don’t talk…neither do donkeys…the earth never stops it’s rotation, axe heads don’t float, seas and rivers are not parted by the wand/staff of a magician or holy man so people can walk across on dry ground.

It is a mythical telling, much like the Oddessy or the Illiad…just with a Semetic bend to it.

Monotheism is a late arriver on the scene of heontheism or polytheism. God was one among many until the Return when He then became the One and Only.

Romans chapter one speaks of worship practices form “exhanging the worship of God for birds” to “temple prostitution”.

Show all of us exactly where in the first chapter of Romans Paul explains this as temple prostitution and

tell me if these same activities occured outside the temple of prostitution in let’s say on stage at the Metropolitan Opera would they then be acceptable…

The place defines the act?

 

[CopticChristian]

Justhad a letter from a gay christian who is not sexually active. It broke my heart for me to read how hurt he has been when particpating in conversations posted here. Seems, we should not be so concerned about winning debates on the topic…Maybe we should try to love others without judging, condeming, or trying to win theological arguments… It is much harder to love others than it is to debate them.

Two things I would do…

First…

Ask your gay christian friend to avoid participating in things that they allow to conjour up in their mind hurt. No one is hurt by anyone, it is all manufactured in our heads and if they are unable to understand that then these posts should be avoided…

Second…

Firstly, the issues of orientation are not yet clearly understood. The debate and relationship between nurture and nature are just not understood. Science has found some interesting things which are leaning towards a view that homosexuality is innate. These include: the cases of identical twins with homosexual orientations; differences in the hypothalamus between straight and gay persons, a correlation between birth order and homosexuality - the fact that with each successive pregnancy where the developing child is male the chance of a homosexual child increases. Also, once the scientific community looked for a gay gene but it appears there are a series of genes, when aligned in certain combinations result in a gay male.

Avoid posting support, like the above, for Essentialism=Born that Way as this is a fallacy and has no basis in reality…what you post is conjoured up by those that want to promote Homosexuality as a separate sexual idenity from male and female.

OK…

 

[Publisher]

Show all of us exactly where in the first chapter of Romans Paul explains this as temple prostitution and

tell me if these same activities occured outside the temple of prostitution in let’s say on stage at the Metropolitan Opera would they then be acceptable…

The place defines the act?

I would think the context would be sufficient. Up until the verses used to “bash” gay people, Paul is speaking of religous practices. Worship practices. Then all of a sudden he goes off on a tangent about homsexuality that has nothing to do with what he was discussing before?

The historical and cultural context of his time must be examined to understand the ramifications and undestanding of the passage. To rip the proof text from it’s context, both literarily and historically and culturally does not proove Paul was writing against same sex relationships as understood in our modern world which he had no idea what so ever the complexity of human sexuality.

Of course your church teaches other wise…so you are bound by it’s teachings…I’m not. And I dare say neither is the Protestant freind of the OP…I just can’t get my mind around your understanding of the passage based on culture and history…let alone Paul’s ignorance of human sexuality.

 

[Publisher]

Then you should have no problem with us Catholics believing that homosexual behavior and abortion are a sin since, according to you, you just want to mind your own business, right?

No I don’t…just as long as you do not seek to enforce those beliefs upon me or others…as long as you do not seek to restrict my freedoms or the freedoms of others you are free to believe as you wish…but “you” do not wish to allow others to determine those things for themselves…you wish to prevent and restrict their freedoms to determine the fate of their own lives because it 'offends" “your” morality.

What you do and say has no bearing on how I am to treat you, care for you, embrace you as a person of worth and dignity…it is my responsibility on how I live and act toward you…not yours for me.

 

[livingwordunity]

Then you should have no problem with us Catholics believing that homosexual behavior and abortion are a sin since, according to you, you just want to mind your own business, right?

No I don’t…just as long as you do not seek to enforce those beliefs upon me or others…as long as you do not seek to restrict my freedoms or the freedoms of others you are free to believe as you wish…but “you” do not wish to allow others to determine those things for themselves…you wish to prevent and restrict their freedoms to determine the fate of their own lives because it 'offends" “your” morality.

What you do and say has no bearing on how I am to treat you, care for you, embrace you as a person of worth and dignity…it is my responsibility on how I live and act toward you…not yours for me.

Are you saying that you don’t think Catholics have a right to vote for or against laws or to have their opinion heard in the public square as everyone else does? Whenever any law gets passed someone who doesn’t like it is being forced to comply. What we Catholics are saying that we have just as much a right as any other citizen to vote for or against a law using our moral judgment or to protest against a law that we see as unjust. It just so happens that our moral judgment properly comes from a conscience formed by the moral teachings of the one and only Church that was founded by Christ.

 

[josh987654321]

No I don’t…just as long as you do not seek to enforce those beliefs upon me or others…

It is instead you that is forcing your beliefs of marriage onto others by being pro same sex marriage.

as long as you do not seek to restrict my freedoms or the freedoms of others you are free to believe as you wish…but “you” do not wish to allow others to determine those things for themselves…you wish to prevent and restrict their freedoms to determine the fate of their own lives because it 'offends" “your” morality.

They are teaching society to love and encourage the sin with same sex marriage, instead they should be teaching society to love the sinner and to discourage the sin by voting against same sex marriage.

What you do and say has no bearing on how I am to treat you, care for you, embrace you as a person of worth and dignity…it is my responsibility on how I live and act toward you…not yours for me.

I admire that, you are right, we should treat everyone with love and mercy, however love and mercy does not involve encouraging sin or claiming that something Immoral is moral, because that is not true love or compassion at all.

You do not love the sin in order to love the sinner, so for a christian to be pro same sex marriage is not true love or compassion, as they know better and are doing worse, they know that the acts of homosexuality are Immoral and they are encouraging them by voting for or supporting same sex marriage, I cannot in good conscience be in support of same sex marriage or acts of homosexuality, because that wouldn’t be loving thy neighbour.

The gospels are clear on marriage being only between a man and a woman (Mathew 19:4-6), the bible is very clear on the acts of homosexuality being sinful (leviticus 18:22, Genesis 19), the very nature of homosexuality means to use the bodies organs in a manner in which they are not designed to be used for, how can you think that any supreme being would be in support of that, the miss use of their beloved creation? and yet you claim that you love thy neighbour by encouraging sinful behaviour, I don’t understand it.

Homosexuals acting on their disordered desires will not provide them with the satisfaction that they are after, it will instead lead them down a destructive path away from Christ in which will ultimately leave them in despair, as a slave to their desires, desires that soul purpose is to self serve, and yet people are encouraging this with same sex marriage and calling it love and compassion, please open your eyes to what you are supporting.

Thank you for reading
Josh

 

[Publisher]

Are you saying that you don’t think Catholics have a right to vote for or against laws or to have their opinion heard in the public square as everyone else does? Whenever any law gets passed someone who doesn’t like it is being forced to comply. What we Catholics are saying that we have just as much a right as any other citizen to vote for or against a law using our moral judgment or to protest against a law that we see as unjust. It just so happens that our moral judgment properly comes from a conscience formed by the moral teachings of the one and only Church that was founded by Christ.

Perhaps your “moral judgement properly comes from a conscience formed…of the one and only Church founded by Christ”…but the laws of this land do not. The laws of this land are based on the Constitution that grants rights to the citizens of this nation.

Your religious beliefs are held sacred by the Constitution…not imposing them upon others is also held sacred by the Constitution.

 

[Publisher]

It is instead you that is forcing your beliefs of marriage onto others by being pro same sex marriage.

Yet you want to trample on my rights of accepting same sex marriage by denying same sex marriage to those who wish to enter into one based on your beleifs.

They are teaching society to love and encourage the sin with same sex marriage, instead they should be teaching society to love the sinner and to discourage the sin by voting against same sex marriage.

"Sin" and “sinner” are religious concepts not addressed in civil law.

I admire that, you are right, we should treat everyone with love and mercy, however love and mercy does not involve encouraging sin or claiming that something Immoral is moral, because that is not true love or compassion at all.

**And that is the rub…we do not share the same concepts of “morality” nor definitions of “compassion” evidently. It is not you to decide that those in same sex marriages do not love each other…or those of us who accept their choices to be married is not really “compassion”

“YOU” do not get to define “love” and “compassion” for me or anyone else under civil law.**

You do not love the sin in order to love the sinner, so for a christian to be pro same sex marriage is not true love or compassion, as they know better and are doing worse, they know that the acts of homosexuality are Immoral and they are encouraging them by voting for or supporting same sex marriage, I cannot in good conscience be in support of same sex marriage or acts of homosexuality, because that wouldn’t be loving thy neighbour.

The gospels are clear on marriage being only between a man and a woman (Mathew 19:4-6), the bible is very clear on the acts of homosexuality being sinful (leviticus 18:22, Genesis 19), the very nature of homosexuality means to use the bodies organs in a manner in which they are not designed to be used for, how can you think that any supreme being would be in support of that, the miss use of their beloved creation? and yet you claim that you love thy neighbour by encouraging sinful behaviour, I don’t understand it.

Homosexuals acting on their disordered desires will not provide them with the satisfaction that they are after, it will instead lead them down a destructive path away from Christ in which will ultimately leave them in despair, as a slave to their desires, desires that soul purpose is to self serve, and yet people are encouraging this with same sex marriage and calling it love and compassion, please open your eyes to what you are supporting.

Again, that is not your decision whethere their desires will provide them satisfaction or not…you cannot force your belief of “destructive path away from Christ” upon onthers in matters of civil law. “Christ” has nothing to do with civil law…that is establishing a religious belief backed by civil law and it is not Constitutional.

Thank you for reading
Josh

 

[livingwordunity]

Perhaps your “moral judgement properly comes from a conscience formed…of the one and only Church founded by Christ”…but the laws of this land do not. The laws of this land are based on the Constitution that grants rights to the citizens of this nation.

Your religious beliefs are held sacred by the Constitution…not imposing them upon others is also held sacred by the Constitution.

The function of law is to impose someone’s morality on people. And religious liberty is a right guaranteed in the US Constitution. That means that in the U.S.A. we Catholics have the same Constitutional right to act in accordance with our morality to affect laws of the land as you do.

 

[CopticChristian]

Publisher:

Publisher
Senior Member

I wait for an answer to this question post 65…

**Show all of us exactly where in the first chapter of Romans Paul explains this as temple prostitution and

tell me if these same activities occured outside the temple of prostitution in let’s say on stage at the Metropolitan Opera would they then be acceptable…

The place defines the act? **

I respect your opinion concerning laws and God…are you fighting with the same vehemence to aid the Athiests in consideration that these words imply that God is at the heart of all law for the USA

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the** Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them**, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are** created **equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved. . . . And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the Protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor

.

I plead and ask that you aid the discussion by addressing the questions and not resort to

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…

just tell us what you think…

 

[Chan26]

Jesus very specifically defines the parameters of marriage in the New Testament as being between a man and a woman and permanent. Any sexual act outside of marriage is condemned as fornication. It’s pretty clear.

Could you cite your source? I can’t find where Jesus* specifically defines the parameters of marriage* You could put this common argument to rest.
thank you
chan

 

[Publisher]

I wait for an answer to this question post 65…

I respect your opinion concerning laws and God…are you fighting with the same vehemence to aid the Athiests in consideration that these words imply that God is at the heart of all law for the USA

.

I plead and ask that you aid the discussion by addressing the questions and not resort to

just tell us what you think…

The “Laws of Nature” and “Laws of God” are not in reference to “Natural Law” as defined by Acquinas and the Catholic church, but pull it’s meaning from the writings of John Locke and other thinkers of his time, a Diest concept of a “Prime Cause” not a “personal God”.

 

[CopticChristian]

The “Laws of Nature” and “Laws of God” are not in reference to “Natural Law” as defined by Acquinas and the Catholic church, but pull it’s meaning from the writings of John Locke and other thinkers of his time, a Diest concept of a “Prime Cause” not a “personal God”.

The…and

The…

but negates all that was said before

appeals to authority and explanation is not an answer to the question…

are you or not able to answer the question?

Show all of us exactly where in the first chapter of Romans Paul explains this as temple prostitution and

tell me if these same activities occured outside the temple of prostitution in let’s say on stage at the Metropolitan Opera would they then be acceptable…

The place defines the act?

 

[Publisher]

The…and

The…

but negates all that was said before

appeals to authority and explanation is not an answer to the question…

are you or not able to answer the question?

Yes I can, however the information is there also for you to review. Since you either have not done so by now or you simply are not interested in doing so, really is of no concern to me in trying to convince you.

The question of why one “refuses” to believe homosexual orientation/acts are wrong have ben answered…you don’t like the answer, nor do you believe that the cultural/historical setting of Paul’s letters helped determine his subject. Homosexuality was not addressed by Paul…the religous practices taking place in the pagan temples was however.

 

[livingwordunity]

Yes I can, however the information is there also for you to review. Since you either have not done so by now or you simply are not interested in doing so, really is of no concern to me in trying to convince you.

The question of why one “refuses” to believe homosexual orientation/acts are wrong have ben answered…you don’t like the answer, nor do you believe that the cultural/historical setting of Paul’s letters helped determine his subject. Homosexuality was not addressed by Paul…the religous practices taking place in the pagan temples was however.

If homosexual acts aren’t condemned in the Bible why would “gay” activists have to come up with their own Bible that omits all those parts that you say aren’t about homosexual behavior?

 

[CopticChristian]

Yes I can, however the information is there also for you to review. Since you either have not done so by now or you simply are not interested in doing so, really is of no concern to me in trying to convince you.

The question of why one “refuses” to believe homosexual orientation/acts are wrong have ben answered…you don’t like the answer, nor do you believe that the cultural/historical setting of Paul’s letters helped determine his subject.

Homosexuality was not addressed by Paul…the religous practices taking place in the pagan temples was however.

and Paul did or did not write the letter to the Romans?

and how is it you place what is described by Paul in pagan temples?

Where in the letter to the Romans does it say this or is this information from other than Scripture, perhaps another tradition?

 

[cwltexas]

For some reason, people, as a practical matter FAIL to separate homosexual acts from homosexual persons, they are not the same thing.

The Holy Roman Catholic Church teaches that homosexual people are just as valuable, important, loved and cared about as anyone else. The Church SPECIFICALLY states that homosexuals are to be treated with respect and kindness, His Holiness Pope Francis has stated as much, I believe?

It has been my experience that people RARELY address just the ACT and not include the person in their derision and condemnation.

I would respectfully remind everyone to consider how they would feel if they were told that their sexuality was abhorrent, vile, sinful and how they might react to such a proclamation.

Are we as determined and resolute to condemn and regulate heterosexual fornication, fellatio, anal sex, other than casual mention and verbal reproach? Does such reproach even enter into the same Universe that is employed to attack homosexual conduct? Is sin not sin?

 

[livingwordunity]

For some reason, people, as a practical matter FAIL to separate homosexual acts from homosexual persons, they are not the same thing.

The Holy Roman Catholic Church teaches that homosexual people are just as valuable, important, loved and cared about as anyone else. The Church SPECIFICALLY states that homosexuals are to be treated with respect and kindness, His Holiness Pope Francis has stated as much, I believe?

It has been my experience that people RARELY address just the ACT and not include the person in their derision and condemnation.

I would respectfully remind everyone to consider how they would feel if they were told that their sexuality was abhorrent, vile, sinful and how they might react to such a proclamation.

Are we as determined and resolute to condemn and regulate heterosexual fornication, fellatio, anal sex, other than casual mention and verbal reproach? Does such reproach even enter into the same Universe that is employed to attack homosexual conduct? Is sin not sin?

The Church opposes all forms of sin. It’s just that homosexual sin is the current one in vogue. When the polygamists come up to bat for their sin to be called marriage that’s when our focus will shift a bit. Keep in mind that the Catholic Church still won’t recognize a heterosexual “marriage” that has a defect of form. I know because I used to be in an invalid “marriage”. But it failed, and I got an annulment in the Church. I was fortunate that there were no children that happened from it. But my current marriage is a valid one because we got married in the Catholic Church.