scripture and homosexuality

[truagape]

There’s plenty within scripture apart from the episode of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah y’know. No-one here has mentioned them, you’ll notice.

Actually, I did do some noticing. And whether you realize it or not, the unscriptual teachings of the Catholic Church regarding Sodom and Gomorrah, have scattered footprints all throughout later translations of Scripture! And something else I don’t think you mean to be oblivious too, yet continue to be is the termonology that is found within some of the classic resources that have been posted by others on this forum. A keen eye, highlights language that still carries the lie of Sodom and Gomorrah and its erroneous “homosexuality” theory.
So yes, Sodom and Gomorrah indeed has been mentioned, on multiple occassions. And yes, you obviously missed it. And yes, you do avoid the topic and for good reason. Oh The power of Truth!

 

[LilyM]

Actually, I did notice. And whether you realize it or not, the unscriptual teachings of the Catholic Church regarding Sodom and Gomorrah, have scattered footprints all throughout later translations of Scripture! And something else I don’t think you mean to be oblivious too, yet continue to be is the termonology that is found within some of the classic resources that have been posted by others on this forum. A keen eye, highlights language that still carries the lie of Sodom and Gomorrah and its erroneous “homosexuality” theory.
So yes, Sodom and Gomorrah indeed has been mentioned, on multiple occassions. And yes, you obviously missed it. And yes, you do avoid the topic and for good reason. Oh The power of Truth!

You mean the use of the term ‘sodomy’ I presume, or similar? :yawn: No, tired and relatively old my eyes may be but they haven’t missed the use of the term. No particular keenness on your part to pick up on it. Much semantic quibbling on your part to make an issue of it, though.

Put it this way, if I, as a woman, can find it in my heart to accept common usage of terms such as ‘man’ or ‘mankind’ as referring to women as well, and not scream discrimination every time they are, then you can surely accept what for many hundreds of years has been used as a way of referring to homosex (which is the term I prefer, to distinguish the act from the mere inclination).

 

[HashemEchad]

In case anyone is interested…

the traditional Jewish view of homosexuality is that the ACT is sinful, but not the DESIRE (as I understand it, this is also the RC view.)

This is how a Jew (even an Orthodox Jew!) can technically BE a person with a homosexual orientation, but as long as he remains celibate and does not act upon the desire, he has not sinned.

Traditional Judaism, as far as I know, takes no stand on female homosexuality…the sin involved in active male homosexuality involves the wasting of seed (which females cannot do), as well as the fact that in ancient times, male homosexuality was often part of pagan worship.

 

[truagape]

You mean the use of the term ‘sodomy’ I presume, or similar? :yawn: No, tired and relatively old my eyes may be but they haven’t missed the use of the term. No particular keenness on your part to pick up on it. Much semantic quibbling on your part to make an issue of it, though.

Put it this way, if I, as a woman, can find it in my heart to accept common usage of terms such as ‘man’ or ‘mankind’ as referring to women as well, and not scream discrimination every time they are, then you can surely accept what for many hundreds of years has been used as a way of referring to homosex (which is the term I prefer, to distinguish the act from the mere inclination).

You’re free to use that term to refer to what ever you want! But the one thing you can’t do is use that term to supply in Bible translations, when not even the notion of Sodom’s sin and homosexuality is provided, let alone an original Hebrew or Greek word to even compare it to. What you seem to be comfortable with are the “traditions of men”. That’s not good!

 

[revelations]

are the “traditions of men”. That’s not good!

Says who?

 

[revelations]

Despite your cynicism, the offense my remarks presume upon you is nothing short of true. By comparison the massive offense your “catholic orthodoxy”, is guilty of towards the issue of homosexuality, is nothing short of disasterous and unscriptual. It’s a disservice whose scars against a particular segment of humanity run deep and evident. So at the very least, don’t even joke about being offended!

Lol, i’m not offended in the least! I think you expect your provocative statements to rile me up or something, or you are trying to push my buttons. You commented that i speak with a word the the church has spoken with for a long time, and i thanked you for the compliment.

 

[Elric]

I’d love to see your proof, though, that the very plain words of God to ‘be fruitful and multiply’ have been somehow mistranslated or manipulated or do not apply to you or your homosexual buddies in your relationships.

Well by your own admission, they dont apply to you either.

 

[truagape]

Lol, i’m not offended in the least! I think you expect your provocative statements to rile me up or something, or you are trying to push my buttons. You commented that i speak with a word the the church has spoken with for a long time, and i thanked you for the compliment.

Well in that case, you’re welcome! Unfortunately.

 

[LilyM]

Well by your own admission, they dont apply to you either.

No indeedy they don’t - they apply to heterosexual married couples, as Christ makes clear and Paul makes even clearer. That’s why I DON’T have sex :yup: so as not to break God’s command (the first He ever gave to mankind, which should give you some clue as to its importance to Him) and that’s why gays shouldn’t either.

 

[Elric]

No indeedy they don’t - they apply to heterosexual married couples, as Christ makes clear and Paul makes even clearer. That’s why I DON’T have sex :yup: so as not to break God’s command (the first He ever gave to mankind, which should give you some clue as to its importance to Him) and that’s why gays shouldn’t either.

You are just making this up as you go along, arnt you.

 

[LilyM]

You are just making this up as you go along, arnt you.

No, it’s been clear and consistent Catholic Church teaching for 2,000 years that sex is reserved for married heterosexual couples only. Nothing about it that I’ve made up.

 

[PriestPenne]

Well, I’m not a Christian, I’m a Pastafarian, but I can still relate to the struggle you guys are having over homosexuality because followers of my religion are experiencing similar dissensions.

Our prophet, High Master Noodler, came with many messages when he descended to earth. He instructed us to love our neighbors as ourselves, to accept their flaws until we have cleansed ourselves of our own, and to reserve the judgment of souls to God, as He is the only one worthy of passing judgment. He preached love and acceptance despite sin, and sat with sinners himself in an attempt to demonstrate that moral imperfections manifest in us all, even in the devout… he taught modesty and self-reflection and spoke out against prejudice and hostility, as we are all sinners, and no one sin is held to be greater than another.

As such, many of my Church believe that we, as sinners ourselves who are not worthy of passing judgment on High Master Noodler’s other creatures, should not discriminate against or, in fact, judge homosexuals. They frequently ask, “What would Noodler do?”

…But then I just say “screw it”, who cares what he’d do? He’s only the prophet, it isn’t like our religion is based off his teachings or anything.

 

[feetxxxl]

Since when does slavery have anything at all to do with sexuality? Talk about comparing apples and oranges. Start another thread if you’re interested.

And since when is the APA relevant in any way to determining what is morally good? Great scientists they may be, as a collective they know zip about morality and probably wouldn’t even consider it their place to comment on the MORAL implications of what they say.

I doubt they’ve come out as saying adultery is bad, that fornication is bad, that lust is bad - yet all these things are morally repugnant.

The Christian Church has always taught that sex is certainly about more than procreation - we rather listen to Genesis’ own account of why God created man and woman to be together. Firstly because ‘it is not good for the man to be alone’. Nowhere is it even hinted that the remedy for this is another man, rather it is a woman. And the church has always taught about this unitive aspect of marital sex.

Then, secondly but no less importantly, the necessity of procreation. This is because marriage is designed as a mirror of the Trinity itself. God’s love for His son is fruitful and produces - not good feelings, but ANOTHER PERSON in the form of the Holy Spirit. So, in our human marriages, we must at least be open to the possibility of producing children, something a homosexual relationship can never do.

Why is it that NO Christian (or Jew for that matter, and they surely know what the NT says) for 1900 and more years ever interpreted homosexual acts as being anything other than sinful? They understood the purpose of marriage and marital sex, clearly better than you do.

What makes you think God has a different plan for marriage and sex now than he did in Genesis or than Christ and St Paul did in the NT? What is different about Him now? What about Genesis’ description of how it came about, or the NT’s elaboration on it, leads you to think this was only meant to be a temporary state of affairs?

Your teacher taught you about a ‘continuity of spirit’ between OT and NT? Amen, brother - and the same spirit continues in both, and down to the present day, to cry out against the heinous sin of sexual congress with someone of the same gender as yourself.

everything you have brought has already been asked and answered.

your understanding is 'GOD’S COMMANDS". everything i have read every catholic cardinal and priest is based on something called “nature law”.

in romans paul uses the term law 51 times, but says we nolonger have the same relationship to writtren code and are now led by the spirit.

yet your teachers including yourself still refuse to even consider the issue of spirit and, or, the fruit of the spirit.

the spirit that ran thru both testaments was a spirit of love, which is god, and is also the fulfillment of the law.

paul also says that all the law can be summed up in loving your neigthbor as yourself. that being the case anything that is sin would come against this commandment.

so how does the essence of homosexuality, the bonding with another of the same sex out of mutual love attraction respect, devotion, trust, and with believers a shared faith in christ for a committed shared life together come against the commandment?

if you say it violates god’s law or is disobedient to the law, then
your understanding is led by the law which is of the old covennant.

if you say because it involves anal sex, then your understanding is led by your personnal opinion about anal sex, the anus being an errogrnous zone and anal oragasms being possible, and all sex can be engaged in,healthily, thru safe sex practices( like with couples where one has aids)

no credible medical scientific institution has called for the ban on anal sex.

so what is the spirit in being attracted to, wanting to have a shared committed relationship of sharing life’s joys and difficulties, successes and failures, wanting to be physically and emotionally close, which involves sexual intimacy which of itself is an affirmation of the devotion of the committed relationship, come against the summation of all the law. loving ones neighbor as oneself?

 

[Eden]

everything you have brought has already been asked and answered.

Feetxxxl, no matter how many posts you make and no matter how many ways you phrase it, the Catholic Church will never change its teachings on homosexuality… ever. I get the sense that you think if you post that homosexual acts are normal enough times, someone here is going to change their mind.

Did you lift your homosexual propaganda technique from the pages of Hitler’s Mein Kampf?

**“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.” - **Hitler on War Propaganda

 

[LilyM]

so how does the essence of homosexuality, the bonding with another of the same sex out of mutual love attraction respect, devotion, trust, and with believers a shared faith in christ for a committed shared life together come against the commandment?

if you say it violates god’s law or is disobedient to the law, then
your understanding is led by the law which is of the old covennant.

No, brother - God’s commands (though not the Levitical law) are for all time, not just for the Old Covenant. Which is why Jesus told the rich young man that he had to OBEY the ten commandments of Moses if he would have eternal life, and loved him for his faithful obedience to them, and that is why theft, murder etc are just as sinful today as they were in Moses’ day!

True, Jesus gave the two GREAT commandments - but remember there are TWO of them, not just the one that you love to quote. And note the first and most important is loving God with our heart, mind, soul - and yes, our body. Our bodies belong to God first and foremost, not to ourselves, not to others, and our sexual faculties are to be used as HE mandates, not simply as we desire, yes?

Note too that this FIRST and greatest command sometimes conflicts with ‘loving’ (as we mistakenly perceive love) our neighbour. To underline this, Jesus said we must be prepared to HATE our family and friends for His sake, so the two commands aren’t equal and our mistaken ideas of ‘love they neighbour’ sometimes breaks the GREATEST command to love God above all else.

What I say is that if you TRULY love someone, then above all you want them to be saved, you want heaven for them. Nothing else in terms of making them feel good, or making yourself feel good, even the most wonderful emotional relationship with them, matters in the slightest if in gaining it you’ve damned your own soul and theirs.

So if you truly love someone, above all you don’t want them to sin and you don’t want to lead them into sin. This is the supreme good and the ultimate form of love.

Now if God’s commands, including the command against homosexual sex, still are applicable, as Christ says they surely are, then you are in fact in serious danger of damning your own soul if you disobey them, by engaging in homosexual sex among the other sins, and dragging anyone else who you influence to disobey them into damnation with you.

so what is the spirit in being attracted to, wanting to have a shared committed relationship of sharing life’s joys and difficulties, successes and failures, wanting to be physically and emotionally close, which involves sexual intimacy which of itself is an affirmation of the devotion of the committed relationship, come against the summation of all the law. loving ones neighbor as oneself?

The spirit comes against it because it is a sinful spirit - one which mocks God’s laws regarding sex and marriage, which laws still apply every bit as much as the Ten Commandments do, as St Paul teaches us.

It is not a true spirit of love, nor is it true love either of self or neighbour, because it goes against how God bids us to express our love. And remember not all expressions of love are according to God’s will, not all are of His spirit, adulterous love certainly isn’t.

You can understand, surely, that an adulterous relationship may fulfil all the criteria you have listed, but is nonetheless wrong and NOT of God because it breaks one’s marital vows. One is bound to love one’s wedded spouse and forsake all others, so any adulterous relationship, no matter how wonderful, is NOT confoming to the command to love our neighbour.

So it is with homosexual sex - it fulfils your criteria but nonetheless is NOT of a true spirit of love of self and neighbour, since it goes against how God bids us express that love.

Above all - if one truly loves oneself one desires salvation above all else - one desires it above even an emotional or any other relationship with others. As Christ warned us, one must be prepared to hate and offend all the world rather than do anything which is even potentially offensive to God, which homosexual sex certainly is.

Brother, think about these things. People have NOT changed so much since their creation that marriage and sex serve different functions today than they did in Adam and Eve’s time. And above all God certainly hasn’t changed HIS plans for sex and marriage, nor His laws about them.

 

[feetxxxl]

Feetxxxl, no matter how many posts you make and no matter how many ways you phrase it, the Catholic Church will never change its teachings on homosexuality… ever. I get the sense that you think if you post that homosexual acts are normal enough times, someone here is going to change their mind.

Did you lift your homosexual propaganda technique from the pages of Hitler’s Mein Kampf?

**“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.” - **Hitler on War Propaganda

THEN WHY DONT YOU SIMPLY ANSWER MY QUESTION? HOW DOES IT COME AGAINST THE COMMANDMENT?

by not answering my question are you saying it doesnt?

 

[wisdomseeker]

everything you have brought has already been asked and answered.

your understanding is 'GOD’S COMMANDS". everything i have read every catholic cardinal and priest is based on something called “nature law”.

in romans paul uses the term law 51 times, but says we nolonger have the same relationship to writtren code and are now led by the spirit.

yet your teachers including yourself still refuse to even consider the issue of spirit and, or, the fruit of the spirit.

the spirit that ran thru both testaments was a spirit of love, which is god, and is also the fulfillment of the law.

paul also says that all the law can be summed up in loving your neigthbor as yourself. that being the case anything that is sin would come against this commandment.

so how does the essence of homosexuality, the bonding with another of the same sex out of mutual love attraction respect, devotion, trust, and with believers a shared faith in christ for a committed shared life together come against the commandment?

if you say it violates god’s law or is disobedient to the law, then
your understanding is led by the law which is of the old covennant.

if you say because it involves anal sex, then your understanding is led by your personnal opinion about anal sex, the anus being an errogrnous zone and anal oragasms being possible, and all sex can be engaged in,healthily, thru safe sex practices( like with couples where one has aids)

no credible medical scientific institution has called for the ban on anal sex.

so what is the spirit in being attracted to, wanting to have a shared committed relationship of sharing life’s joys and difficulties, successes and failures, wanting to be physically and emotionally close, which involves sexual intimacy which of itself is an affirmation of the devotion of the committed relationship, come against the summation of all the law. loving ones neighbor as oneself?

whatch out!
you keep mention the Spirit. the fruits of the Spirit. i hope you are not implying that the Spirit, if we are talking about the Spirit of the Lord, have anything to do with your action of homosexuality.

because if you are, i can only ask Our God to forgive you for such a blasphemy.

the Laws of God still here and we commanded to obey them. what needs to be clear is that these laws were never meant to save anyone. people seem to get confused on that.
salvation would come from one Person Jesus Christ.

:bowdown: :byzsoc: :angel1:

 

[LilyM]

THEN WHY DONT YOU SIMPLY ANSWER MY QUESTION? HOW DOES IT COME AGAINST THE COMMANDMENT?

by not answering my question are you saying it doesnt?

We’re answering it over and over again - you’re just not wanting to listen to the answer!

It is an illegitimate and sinful expression of love, just as adultery or fornication are, no matter how much relationships that involve adultery or fornication may otherwise meet the other criteria you’ve listed.

Clearly, then, it is your understanding of what it means to ‘love one’s neighbour’ that is lacking.

What I said in my last post bears repeating - if one truly loves, one desires the salvation of the beloved’s soul above all other goods, since all other goods (even the goods that can come from a loving relationship) are utterly inferior.

So one will not break God’s (still applicable) law in expressing that love, whether it be by committing adultery or fornication or by homosexual acts.

 

[feetxxxl]

whatch out!
you keep mention the Spirit. the fruits of the Spirit. i hope you are not implying that the Spirit, if we are talking about the Spirit of the Lord, have anything to do with your action of homosexuality.

because if you are, i can only ask Our God to forgive you for such a blasphemy.

the Laws of God still here and we commanded to obey them. what needs to be clear is that these laws were never meant to save anyone. people seem to get confused on that.
salvation would come from one Person Jesus Christ.

:bowdown: :byzsoc: :angel1:

in the new covenant of christ we are called to live the three commandments of love.

does your not not answering also mean it doesnt?

 

[feetxxxl]

We’re answering it over and over again - you’re just not wanting to listen to the answer!

It is an illegitimate and sinful expression of love

OF WHAT SPIRIT IS IT, THAT MAKES IT ILLEGITIMATE AND SINFUL?

, just as adultery or fornication are, no matter how much relationships that involve adultery or fornication may otherwise meet the other criteria you’ve listed.
WOULD DAVID HAD TAKEN HIS NEIGHBOR’S WIFE IF HE HAD LOVE HIM AS HE LOVED HIMSELF.

FORNICATION IS SO BROAD…DOES THAT MEAN MARRIAGES PERFORMED AT VEGAS NUPTIAL DRIVE-INS ARE MARRIAGES…THEN THE STATE SHOULD BE CONDEMNED FOR ENCOURAGING SIN

Clearly, then, it is your understanding of what it means to ‘love one’s neighbour’ that is lacking.

EXACTLY AS IT SAYS LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOU LOVE YOURSELF…HOW, WHEN AND WHERE DO YOU LOVE YOURSELF?

What I said in my last post bears repeating - if one truly loves, one desires the salvation of the beloved’s soul above all other goods, since all other goods (even the goods that can come from a loving relationship) are utterly inferior.

THIS IS SO BROAD IT MAKES NO SENSE.

So one will not break God’s (still applicable) law in expressing that love, whether it be by committing adultery or fornication or by homosexual acts.

---

WHICH MEANS BEING LED BY THE LAW…WHY DONT YOU OWN IT?