scripture and homosexuality

[Elric]

YAWN

278 or so posts later…maybe this will get interesting? I think not.

Challenge: Show me where homosexuality is prohibited in scripture.

Answered: Many times over.

Challenge: That’s not what it means.

Answered: Yes it does.

Challenge: No it doesn’t. My questions haven’t been answered.

Answered: Yes they have. What about my questions.

Challenge: Been answered see post (fill in the blank here)

Repeat ad nauseum.

About the only interesting thing I find in this thread is Feet’s use of “god” and “christ” instead of “God” and “Christ”.

That and what does this thread have to do with Non-Catholic religions?

:yawn:

And your post contributed what exactly to the debate?

You know what I do when there is a thread that I find boring?

I dont read it.

 

[Newbie2]

And your post contributed what exactly to the debate?

You know what I do when there is a thread that I find boring?

I dont read it.

It’s the same old, same old. No new insights. Search for any homosexual thread on the forum and you’ll find pretty much the same thing, if the discussion centers around scripture and homosexuality.

My contribution is the observation that “feet” doesn’t use “God” and “Christ”, to which I read in a lack of respect or simply a lack of proper grammar.

 

[Bwsherman]

This keeps poping up, the argument of ceremonial law and moral law.

But what exactly are ceremonial law and moral law?

Where does the bible seperate the two and give us a clear indication of what falls under what?

From what I have been able to find out, it seems as though moral law is the 10 commandments and ceremonial law is the mosiac law.

Doesn’t your response here answer your own question? Moral law is encompassed in the ten commandments and then given its summation in Jesus stating the two great commandements Mt 22:36 “[Jesus], which is the great commandment in the law?” And he said to him, ’You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the law and the prophets.”

Ceremonial law pertained to temple worship and was no longer necessary after Jesus because he had offerred the “sacrifice” on our behalf. However, moral law continues.

 

[feetxxxl]

and where does ethnic slavery fit into this dichotomy of law, which the church supported for 1800 years?

the reasoning behind their support, was because of how it was dealt with in scripture.

 

[Bwsherman]

and where does ethnic slavery fit into this dichotomy of law, which the church supported for 1800 years?

the reasoning behind their support, was because of how it was dealt with in scripture.

I think this in response to what I asked earlier and instead of answering the question you give some kind of a backhanded attempt to connect the Catholic Church and slavery…I don’t follow you and it still does not justify your interpretation of scripture. Try focusing on that.

 

[feetxxxl]

are not laws about slavery part of the moral law?

 

[donmaximuso27]

are not laws about slavery part of the moral law?

Laws of slavery most definitely involve questions of morals and ethics, but are judicial laws. I would like to see historical evidence of where the Church has openly supported slavery. Throughout the early centuries of the Church, it was Christians that were the common slaves; we were also slaves in Medieval Muslim nations, the Irish Catholics became slaves under the Vikings and later the English, Catholics suffered extreme oppression during the rise of Protestantism in France, Germany, and Northern Europe, and today, millions of Catholics in China, Africa, and South America are suffering from brutal persecution and oppression. Yet, you would have us believe that the Church has caused and supported slavery.

 

[feetxxxl]

in other words you are saying that moral law can be judicial law, but judicial law cannot be moral law.

 

[donmaximuso27]

in other words you are saying that moral law can be judicial law, but judicial law cannot be moral law.

No, I am saying moral law very specifically defines a moral belief of God. Judicial law, such as slavery, may encompass many different aspects of morality and ethics. However, judicial law as a whole is just that, judicial. Moral law can be involved in judicial law, but is not the whole judicial law itself.

 

[Bwsherman]

in other words you are saying that moral law can be judicial law, but judicial law cannot be moral law.

I believe what he is stating is that moral law is above judicial law, however, since the Catholic Church is not a government or a country it cannot prohibit slavery in one area or another. It can say that it is morally wrong, and I believe he was citing numerous incidences where this wrong was being done to Catholics.

What does this even have to do with the purpose of your thread? You still lack any support for your position outside of “oh, but I get this from scripture”. As has already been stated, this point is not enough to prove anything.

 

[peary]

=
Ceremonial law pertained to temple worship and was no longer necessary after Jesus because he had offerred the “sacrifice” on our behalf. However, moral law continues.

True, but we still have the Mass, which *could *be perceived as ceremonial law, but not in the sense of the Temple offerings.

 

[feetxxxl]

show me judical law that has no moral law in it, if all judical law has moral law in it, judical is about moral law.

 

[Bwsherman]

True, but we still have the Mass, which *could *be perceived as ceremonial law, but not in the sense of the Temple offerings.

Well, in a way liturgy has taken the place of ceremonial law. Just as the Eucharist takes away the sacrifices that were necessary in the temple…

 

[Bwsherman]

show me judical law that has no moral law in it, if all judical law has moral law in it, judical is about moral law.

What is your point about all of this?

 

[Eden]

St. Paul calls homosexuality shameless, unnatural, and a perversity (Rom 1:27; 1 Cor 6:9; 1 Tim 1:10). The Greek word St. Paul uses for “homosexual” is arsenokoitai (arsen = male; koitus = copulation). The word literally means “men sexual relations,” in other words, men having sex with men. You can’t get much clearer than that. The Old Testament likewise condemned homosexuality (see, for example, Gen. 18:20; 19:5; Lev. 19:22).

This is from “A Dialogue with a Homosexual”

More here:

scripturecatholic.com/sexuality_qa.html#scripture-III

 

[feetxxxl]

koitai means bed.

in conjunction with what was written in romans …it refers to any behavior that is shame based.

homosexuality is about bonding in the same spirit as is done among heterosexuals therefore is not referred to by this term.

why would paul create or affirm another law that we are to die to, to receive christ?

 

[peary]

koitai means bed.

in conjunction with what was written in romans …it refers to any behavior that is shame based.

homosexuality is about bonding in the same spirit as is done among heterosexuals therefore is not referred to by this term.

why would paul create or affirm another law that we are to die to, to receive christ?

**You have a BIG issue with the meaning of words…not only big, but massive. ‘Coitus’ is from Latin, meaning, ‘copulate’ which comes from the Greek koitai which is the same thing. Any common dictionary will have shown you that. This bending and twisting of word meanings to suit your own agenda is what will eventually allow the grace of God to drain from your own soul.

 

[feetxxxl]

9juhikol;p’
]\

**You have a BIG issue with the 47125meaning of words…not only big, but massive. ‘Coitus’ is from Latin, meaning, ‘copulate’ which comes from the Greek *koitai ***which is the same thing. Any common dictionary will have shown you that. This bending and twisting of word meanings to suit your own agenda is what will eventually allow the grace of God to drain from your own soul.

you got it right latin(Roman) which comes from the greek(greece) that preexisted before rome, which means bed…because the romans connected copulation as an activity that is done in the bed.

 

[Eden]

9juhikol;p’
]\

you got it right latin(Roman) which comes from the greek(greece) that preexisted before rome, which means bed…because the romans connected copulation as an activity that is done in the bed.

In 1 Cor 9:9, St. Paul uses the word ARSENOKOITAI, stating that such persons will not inherit the kingdom of heaven: “Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals.” This word appears one other time in the New Testament, 1Tm 1:10: “and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching.”

The Greek word ARSENOKOITAI is a combination of the words ARSEN = “male”; and KOITUS = “sexual copulation.” We have a word in English, “coitus,” which means sexual intercourse. So here we have a word in Greek that is about as precise as a word can be to describe two males having sexual relations. The word ARSENOKOITAI literally means “male sexual relations.”

We also find the word ARSENOKOITAI in classical Greek literature many years before and after the New Testament made use of the word. It appeared in the Revenue Laws of Ptolemy Philadelphus 6, 10, 25; Anthologia Palatina 9, 686, 5; and Catalogus Codicum Astrologorum Graecorum viii, 4, p. 196, 6; 8; and the Sibylene Oracles 2, 73 and Polycarp to the Philippians 5:3.The pedigree is established, and thus, any claims to “homosexuality” surfacing as merely a “nineteenth century” classification is simply fallacious.

Source:

catholicintl.com/epologetics/dialogs/bible/bib_homo.htm

We know that homosexuality was a part of ancient Greek society. The fact that the same word used to describe homosexuality in ancient Greek texts was used in the Bible makes it clear that the word means homosexuals.

 

[feetxxxl]

We also find the word ARSENOKOITAI in classical Greek literature many years before and after the New Testament made use of the word. It appeared in the Revenue Laws of Ptolemy Philadelphus 6, 10, 25; Anthologia Palatina 9, 686, 5; and Catalogus Codicum Astrologorum Graecorum viii, 4, p. 196, 6; 8; and the Sibylene Oracles 2, 73 and Polycarp to the Philippians 5:3.The pedigree is established, and thus, any claims to “homosexuality” surfacing as merely a “nineteenth century” classification is simply fallacious.

you are clinging to a regulation approach to sin…you are emphasizing the act. anyone can obey a regulation out of pride, fear, anxiety and a host of other spirits, rather than love,

however the three commandments emphasize love

jesus emphasized the heart. you are saying that paul reemphasized that sex between people of the same sex as sin. that’s impossible because their hearts are of the same spirit as when heterosexuals bond. paul emphasized being led by the spirit. your emphasis on act ignores the spirit.

in none of the quotings above was “arsenkoitai” was ever used to describe a relationship bonded out of mutual respect, devotion, trust, and love(agapi) along with attraction for a commited shared life together.

remember

Isaiah 1:

5Why should you be beaten anymore? Why do you persist in rebellion? Your whole head is injured, your whole heart afflicted.

11 “The multitude of your sacrifices—
what are they to me?” says the LORD.
"I have more than enough of burnt offerings,
of rams and the fat of fattened animals;
I have no pleasure
in the blood of bulls and lambs and goats.

17 learn to do right!
Seek justice,
encourage the oppressed. [a]
Defend the cause of the fatherless,
plead the case of the widow.

FOR THIS THERE IS NO LAW