Same sex marriage and the various views in Christianity.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Christian_Unity
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I hope you are not just trolling then.
Of course not. This is one on the most important issues in our American society today. I saw many Christians who did not know what to think after the election in regards to Obama and the approval of same sex marriages in which the states had the issue on the ballot. I for one believe in separation of church and state, so same sex marriage is a secular issue for equal rights for all, regardless of what someone believes in a religious sense. It does bother me when the conservative Fundamentalist right tried to say that traditional marriage is between a man and a woman. That is wrong on two accounts: biblically, that is not true, and in world standards, polygamy has always been the norm in considering all the countries in the world.
 
Here’s the “normal standard of the New Testament”. This is the light of scripture, not the twisting of scripture.

Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God" (1 Corinthians 6:9-11).

26 For this reason God gave them up to degrading passions. Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error.
28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind and to things that should not be done. 29 They were filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, covetousness, malice. Full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, craftiness, they are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters,[f] insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, rebellious towards parents, 31 foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32 They know God’s decree, that those who practise such things deserve to die—yet they not only do them but even applaud others who practise them. (Romans 1).
Christians fall on both sides of the issue:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blessin…stian_churches
 
That’s why Christ gave us the Catholic Church…to know and explain the Truth. 1 Timothy 3:15

But if I should be delayed, you should know how to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.
Oh… I’m sure there is quite a few Catholic clergy and laity that may see things quite differently. How about the subject of priests and nuns having the right to marry?
 
If they don’t “know” what you “know” then they are not just “choosing” to ignore it. It has just never a part of their faith or what they were taught.
Ah, gotcha. So 2+2 doesn’t equal four until you learn it somewhere. Or, 2+2 = 5 if that’s what I was raised to believe.

What, says you? That can’t fly, because 2 + 2 must always equal 4? Right you’d be.

Similarly, truths about Christianity do not change simply because some people choose not to believe them, or weren’t raised with them. Some people simply choose to do their own version of math, regardless of the mistakes and consequences it creates for others. 🤷 Others never had a good math teacher…still doesn’t make 2+2=5.
 
Oh… I’m sure there is quite a few Catholic clergy and laity that may see things quite differently. How about the subject of priests and nuns having the right to marry?
What about it? It’s a discipline that any priest or nun chooses to embrace when they enter the religious life, and the merits of that discipline are obvious and fruitful.
 
man this is a good subject…well to just clear up some things and explian what i learned about doctrines…the doctrine of the church is there for guidance…other churches say they can worship God any way they want…that its just a relationship we one bein to God…thats not the way its supposed to be…the church is Jesus wife…its not one person…thats what i see wrong with life now…everybody wants to do what they want to do and say oh well…God will forgive me…cause im saved…thats why we have man to man woman to woman…relations…cause nobody wants to follow rules…for everybody that say they r saved and i repent to God only…is wrong…Jesus showed the way for forgiveness…its easy…how can i say…oh well i dont want it to be winter right now…i want it to be summer…lol…i know for a fact that wont happen…why…cause there is order in nature and also the way God made things…there is a order to Gods things…so when something is wrong…no human will make it right…only God through Christ we it be solved…so think about it…now these other churchs r finally learning about how special Mary was…the Catholic church always has the keys to life and to heaven…it says so…in Gods word…Love my Catholic Church…just think about it…at least we did not remove books from the bible…to make our religion…lol…do yalls research…yall will find the truth…De Colores!
 
Ah, gotcha. So 2+2 doesn’t equal four until you learn it somewhere. Or, 2+2 = 5 if that’s what I was raised to believe.

What, says you? That can’t fly, because 2 + 2 must always equal 4? Right you’d be.

Similarly, truths about Christianity do not change simply because some people choose not to believe them, or weren’t raised with them. Some people simply choose to do their own version of math, regardless of the mistakes and consequences it creates for others. 🤷 Others never had a good math teacher…still doesn’t make 2+2=5.
But that does not mean that they are not trying with all their heart to follow Jesus, which was the original argument that you made.
 
But that does not mean that they are not trying with all their heart to follow Jesus, which was the original argument that you made.
No, I didn’t lump them all in. I think that some do try, and others don’t, but have lied enough to themselves to become comfortable with that, or are simply comfortable with lying.
 
So does the fact that biblical figures engaged in polygamy therefore justify homosexuality? Where does that logic come from? We have a clear standard by Christ that marriage is between two, that God has set an order from the begining and this is the standard we ought follow. Simply becuase holy figures have erred is no excuse to immitate them and even if we grant polygamy, there is then no biblical, patristic or logical reason why homosexuality ought be permitted. Anyone who claims be Christian and supports homosexuality is simply fooling themselves, they want the church to conform to the modern standards of the world. If you people existed in the second century you would be with the gnostics and say its okay to eat meat given to Idols.
 
Augustine:

That the holy fathers of olden times after Abraham, and before him, to whom God gave His testimony that “they pleased Him,” [Heb. 11:4-6] thus used their wives, no one who is a Christian ought to doubt, since it was permitted to certain individuals amongst them to have a plurality of wives, where the reason was for the multiplication of their offspring, not the desire of varying gratification… . . That the good purpose of marriage, however, is better promoted by one husband with one wife, than by a husband with several wives, is shown plainly enough by the very first union of a married pair, which was made by the Divine Being Himself, with the intention of marriages taking their beginning therefrom, and of its affording to them a more honourable precedent. In the advance, however, of the human race, it came to pass that to certain good men were united a plurality of good wives, — many to each; and from this it would seem that moderation sought rather unity on one side for dignity, while nature permitted plurality on the other side for fecundity. For on natural principles it is more feasible for one to have dominion over many, than for many to have dominion over one………** Now, although the fact of the matter is, that while nature loves singleness in her dominations, but we may see plurality existing more readily in the subordinate portion of our race; yet for all that, it was at no time lawful for one man to have a plurality of wives, except for the purpose of a greater number of children springing from him. Wherefore, if one woman cohabits with several men, inasmuch as no increase of offspring accrues to her there from, but only a more frequent gratification of lust, she cannot possibly be a wife, but only a harlot………For this is preserved in the case of Christ and the Church; so that, as a living one with a living one, there is no divorce, no separation forever. And so complete is the observance of this bond in the city of our God, in His holy mountain—that is to say, in the Church of Christ—by all married believers, who are undoubtedly members of Christ, that, although women marry, and men take wives, for the purpose of procreating children, it is never permitted one to put away even an unfruitful wife for the sake of having another to bear children…** (A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of The Christian Church, Volume 5, page 267).
According to Augustine it seems one man and one woman is the best marriage; and all marriages are for procreation. Same-sex unions do not procreate.
 
Christian Unity;10069645:
Augustine:

That the holy fathers of olden times after Abraham, and before him, to whom God gave His testimony that “they pleased Him,” [Heb. 11:4-6] thus used their wives, no one who is a Christian ought to doubt, since it was permitted to certain individuals amongst them to have a plurality of wives, where the reason was for the multiplication of their offspring, not the desire of varying gratification… . . That the good purpose of marriage, however, is better promoted by one husband with one wife, than by a husband with several wives, is shown plainly enough by the very first union of a married pair, which was made by the Divine Being Himself, with the intention of marriages taking their beginning therefrom, and of its affording to them a more honourable precedent.
In the advance, however, of the human race, it came to pass that to certain good men were united a plurality of good wives, — many to each; and from this it would seem that moderation sought rather unity on one side for dignity, while nature permitted plurality on the other side for fecundity. For on natural principles it is more feasible for one to have dominion over many, than for many to have dominion over one………** Now, although the fact of the matter is, that while nature loves singleness in her dominations, but we may see plurality existing more readily in the subordinate portion of our race; yet for all that, it was at no time lawful for one man to have a plurality of wives, except for the purpose of a greater number of children springing from him. Wherefore, if one woman cohabits with several men, inasmuch as no increase of offspring accrues to her there from, but only a more frequent gratification of lust, she cannot possibly be a wife, but only a harlot………For this is preserved in the case of Christ and the Church; so that, as a living one with a living one, there is no divorce, no separation forever. And so complete is the observance of this bond in the city of our God, in His holy mountain—that is to say, in the Church of Christ—by all married believers, who are undoubtedly members of Christ, that, although women marry, and men take wives, for the purpose of procreating children, it is never permitted one to put away even an unfruitful wife for the sake of having another to bear children…** (A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of The Christian Church, Volume 5, page 267).
According to Augustine it seems one man and one woman is the best marriage; and all marriages are for procreation. Same-sex unions do not procreate. Time to find another Saint that “supported” same sex marraige and/or polygamy.
 
Stephen168;10071851:
Time to find another Saint that “supported” same sex marraige and/or polygamy.
Protestants believe that all who are united to Christ are Saints. So, here you go… one of our favorite Saints:

What Did Luther Say About Polygamy?

Martin Luther said polygamy is permissible:

I confess that I cannot forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict the Scripture. If a man wishes to marry more than one wife he should be asked whether he is satisfied in his conscience that he may do so in accordance with the word of God. In such a case the civil authority has nothing to do in the matter. (De Wette II, 459, ibid., pp. 329-330.)

Martin Luther once advised an inhabitant of Orlamunde to take a second wife, in addition to the one then living. Luther also reluctantly approved of a bigamous marriage in the case of Landgrave Philip of Hesse, who was united to a secondary wife, Margarethe von der Saale, on March 4, 1540. Since this advice was given in a confessional, Luther refused to acknowledge his part in sanctioning the marriage.
 

Incestuous polygamous marriages were the normal standard with God’s saints in the OT Scriptures. Do you think Adam and Eve’s children had incestuous relationships? How do we know if Adam didn’t have multiple wives since polygamy was the norm, and Adam lived to 800? Abraham married his half sister and had more than one wife. Isaac married family. Jacob married several relatives. God blessed David with multiple wives. God even instructed Israelite warriors on how to take women as booty from the conquered tribes as additional wives. Jesus even gave us a parable of the ten virgin brides and one bridegroom. I am not debating for or against same sex marriage. I’m just saying the argument of a traditional marriage between a man and woman does not hold up in the light of Scripture.
And I’ll repeat --what God permits and what He has ordained are two separate things.

We have free will and that means that despite God’s ordaining marriage as one man and one woman, individual people are going to ‘screw it up’. . .polygamy, incest. Does that mean we redefine marriage as ‘anything goes’ because people did it once? Gee, we’d have no laws.

AND IT’S SO INTERESTING how you ‘cherry pick’ St. Augustine as if **only those words you posted were the sum total of what he said. They aren’t. **

God gave a MURDERER–King David-- an UNBREAKABLE line. Does that mean it’s okay to murder because David did and he was ‘rewarded’? Was David rewarded for ONE sin he repented of, or for some other reason?

Did God ‘reward’ the prophets BECAUSE they had ‘multiple wives’ or IN SPITE OF that fact?

Please be careful not to make inferences that don’t really stand the test of time. . .
 
I guess polygamy is another topic in which Catholics and Christians disagree over. I know Augustine and Luther both defended polygamy. It is strange to post that polygamy is still the norm around the world (Google it). Here is a link from Christians who believe in bible polygamy. I am not taken sides for either or against polygamy, nor am I taking a position for or against same sex marriage. I just think these discussions are very interesting.

🍿

Check out this link:

biblepolygamy.com/
A: Catholics are CHRISTIANS. (the first ones, with the Orthodox)
B. There is a difference between SAINT Augustine perhaps arguing that polygamy might have been permitted as a ‘lesser evil’ at some time, and claiming that he ‘defends it’.

DEFENDS IT as what? As something good? Something the Church follows? Something to keep on? Claims it as a teaching? You keep saying these things as ‘fact’ and you don’t back them up.
 
Thanks for all of your postings. It’s time for me to move on to the next thread topic.
 
I guess polygamy is another topic in which Catholics and Christians disagree over. I know Augustine and Luther both defended polygamy. It is strange to post that polygamy is still the norm around the world (Google it). Here is a link from Christians who believe in bible polygamy. I am not taken sides for either or against polygamy, nor am I taking a position for or against same sex marriage. I just think these discussions are very interesting.

🍿

Check out this link:

biblepolygamy.com/
Luther on polygamy
As regards the other matter, my faithful warning and advice is that no man, Christians in particular, should have more than one wife, not only for the reason that offense would be given, and Christians must not needlessly give, but most diligently avoid giving, offense, but also for the reason that we have no word of God regarding this matter on which we might base a belief that such action would be well-pleasing to God and to Christians. Let heathen and Turks do what they please. Some of the ancient fathers had many wives, but they were urged to this by necessity, as Abraham and Jacob, and later many kings, who according to the law of Moses obtained the wives of their friends, on the death of the latter, as an inheritance. The example of the fathers is not a sufficient argument to convince a Christian: he must have, in addition, a divine word that makes him sure, just as they had a word of that kind from God. For where there was no need or cause, the ancient fathers did not have more than one wife, as Isaac, Joseph, Moses, and many others.
and
Let unbelievers do what they please; Christian liberty, however, is regulated by love (charity), so that all that a Christian does is done to serve his fellow-man, provided only that he can render such service without jeopardy and damage to his faith and conscience. Nowadays, however, everybody is striving for a liberty that profits and pleases him, without regard for the profit and improvement which his neighbor might derive from his action. This is contrary to the teaching of St. Paul, who says: ‘All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient’ (1 Cor. 6, 12). Only see that your liberty does not become an occasion to the flesh. . . . **Moreover, although the patriarchs had many wives, Christians may not follow their example, because there is no necessity for doing this, no improvement is obtained thereby, and, especially, there is no word of God to justify this practise, while great offense and trouble may come from it. Accordingly, I do not believe that Christians any longer have this liberty. God would have to publish a command that would declare such a liberty." **
Jon
 
=Christian Unity;10072473]
Protestants believe that all who are united to Christ are Saints. So, here you go… one of our favorite Saints:
What Did Luther Say About Polygamy?
Martin Luther said polygamy is permissible:
I confess that I cannot forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict the Scripture. If a man wishes to marry more than one wife he should be asked whether he is satisfied in his conscience that he may do so in accordance with the word of God. In such a case the civil authority has nothing to do in the matter. (De Wette II, 459, ibid., pp. 329-330.)
Martin Luther once advised an inhabitant of Orlamunde to take a second wife, in addition to the one then living. Luther also reluctantly approved of a bigamous marriage in the case of Landgrave Philip of Hesse, who was united to a secondary wife, Margarethe von der Saale, on March 4, 1540. Since this advice was given in a confessional, Luther refused to acknowledge his part in sanctioning the marriage.
Continuing the thought…
…but I should not like to see this example introduced amongst Christians. … It does not beseem Christians to seize greedily and for their own advantage on every thing to which their freedom gives them a right. . . . No Christian surely is so God-forsaken as not to be able to practise continence when his partner, owing to the Divine dispensation, proves unfit for matrimony. "
Jon
 
Its not ignoring an argument, it’s being smart about what sources I listen to. I don’t listen to obviously biased sources of any religious or political stripe. I’ve learned a lot on this site, both from the experiences of the members and from material that they post from reputable sources.

I even tried to google the archeological discovery that he was talking about and all I could find on it were articles from extremely biased sources.
Well, I think we all need to be wary of biased sources, but what sources would you accept when one is arguing from a Chrisitan perspective. Is the Bible a biased source? Are the teachings of the early Church Fathers biased sources. We defend our faith on this forum, which we received from the Apostles. Are the Apostles biased sources?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top