Sodom and gommorah same sex what?

  • Thread starter Thread starter truagape
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
truagape said:
You most certainly did! And it’s easy to see why you perfer such a “biased interpretation”. However, I’m not interested in the translation you provided. All one has to do is compare it to the original Greek and Hebrew, to bring to the surface that which isn’t true. And that’s what you, for obvious reasons, are unwilling to do!
Click to expand...
Give it up traugpage. You want to claim that virtually EVERY Catholic as well as Protestant bible translation gets it wrong in each of those verses that utterly condemns unnatural male-male coupling?

COME ON GET REAL!

Do you think that there is a single legitimate bible translation on the planet that justifies homosexual unions??? So, you are the missing link sent here to earth to correct all the mistakes of humanity in the last 4000 years that has spoken out against homosexuality in the bible? Is that what you want us to believe?!Let’s go the other way with it traugpage. YOU show us a bible translation that has ANY standing in the theological community that translates all those verses as well as the ECF teachings as anything but homosexual.

You are deluding yourself and at this point I am convinced that you are in self denial and are not of rational mind and need professional help. No matter what you say you can not change the fact that The Church as well as the OT Jews have always rejected homosexual unions. If you want to start your own belief you can’t hijack scripture to make it say what you want. The world does not need a new “teaching of traugpage” nor a new gospel that none of the apostles ever taught. You are working directly against God and His Church in promoting any kind of justification for homosexual unions. I want clarification - is that what you are are doing? Come out with it. Be honest. Do you reject Catholic Teaching? If so, do you think anyone here is going to give you any ear or that you are going to change it? :rolleyes:

James
 
I am not interested in your personal rants or opinions. I am only interested in the scriptural facts as preserved within the content and context of scripture. All Christians should be. It’s obvious that you do not hold such an interest, and for obvious reasons!
Click to expand...
More **** semantic tricks to justify deviant behavior.
 
CentralFLJames said:
Give it up traugpage. You want to claim that virtually EVERY Catholic as well as Protestant bible translation gets it wrong in each of those verses that utterly condemns unnatural male-male coupling?

COME ON GET REAL!

Do you think that there is a single legitimate bible translation on the planet that justifies homosexual unions??? So, you are the missing link sent here to earth to correct all the mistakes of humanity in the last 4000 years that has spoken out against homosexuality in the bible? Is that what you want us to believe?!Let’s go the other way with it traugpage. YOU show us a bible translation that has ANY standing in the theological community that translates all those verses as well as the ECF teachings as anything but homosexual.

You are deluding yourself and at this point I am convinced that you are in self denial and are not of rational mind and need professional help. No matter what you say you can not change the fact that The Church as well as the OT Jews have always rejected homosexual unions. If you want to start your own belief you can’t hijack scripture to make it say what you want. The world does not need a new “teaching of traugpage” nor a new gospel that none of the apostles ever taught. You are working directly against God and His Church in promoting any kind of justification for homosexual unions. I want clarification - is that what you are are doing? Come out with it. Be honest. Do you reject Catholic Teaching? If so, do you think anyone here is going to give you any ear or that you are going to change it? :rolleyes:

James
Click to expand...
Do I reject Catholic Teaching? I think that any Christian will tell you that any teaching or theology that regects the clear language of the Word of God as preserved within the content and context of scripture should be rejected! And in regards to your comment about the history of the Church and the OT Jews, I don’t think you realize that I totally agree with you on that one. In fact it’s this indelible record of historic preservation that makes my case! When you study the laws of the OT Jews and compare them to the Laws as recorded all throughtout scripture, it becomes apparent why even Jesus, held some of the Jewish authorities in disposition. And when one studies the “catholic teaching” regarding the topic of homosexuality against the scriptural references regarding this “topic”, again a clear distinction inadvertantly arises. And any Christian who values TRUTH as preserved within the content and context of scripture, should hold anything contrary to those scriptures in contempt as well.
 
Starwynd said:
This Wikipedia article might have your answers:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodom_and_Gomorrah

And to the forum, I apologise for my behavior. This is something of a sore spot for me.
Click to expand...
Thank you for the link. I am curious though, and I don’t mean this in any negative way. What is it about this topic that is “something of a sore spot for you”. I would think that the majority of anger and sore spots would be from people such as myself. Those who feel as if they are the lost victims of romantic love and companionship.
 
That is something that is too personal for me to talk about.

It is something I don’t even talk about to my closest friends.
 
Neil_Anthony said:
Here’s another reason you forgot:

The marital act, as designed by God, places the seeds of new life into a nourishing place designed to allow life to begin and for that life to be sustained.

The act of sodomy, instead, puts the seeds of new life into a terrible place designed for the elimination of waste.

The two actions are analgous to the question:
Will I put my baby into a warm safe crib, or into a sewer?

So, the act of sodomy is linked by analogy, to the desecration and destruction of innocent life.
Click to expand...
Wow, Neil-Anthony … your post just triggered an unpleasant memory. Not long ago, I read a hideous short-story which had as its premise the idea of future biotechnology allowing homosexual men to give birth … you guessed it, from their anuses. :eek: The entire process was described in gory detail. The absolute horror of that story stayed with me for weeks afterward. One of those things that I wish I’d never read … and wouldn’t have read had I known from the start where it was going.

The truly frightening thing is that we may be approaching a time (due to advances in biotech) when such horrors truly do become possible in reality, and I have absolutely no doubt that there are some individuals who would eagerly partake of such an “opportunity.”

Let me here state that while I feel deep sympathy for those afflicted with SSA (what a heavy cross that would be! Of that, I have no doubt), I think that we do them (and society) an injustice when we try to normalize and justify practicing homosexuality.
 
Morwenna said:
Wow, Neil-Anthony … your post just triggered an unpleasant memory. Not long ago, I read a hideous short-story which had as its premise the idea of future biotechnology allowing homosexual men to give birth … you guessed it, from their anuses. :eek: The entire process was described in gory detail. The absolute horror of that story stayed with me for weeks afterward. One of those things that I wish I’d never read … and wouldn’t have read had I known from the start where it was going.

The truly frightening thing is that we may be approaching a time (due to advances in biotech) when such horrors truly do become possible in reality, and I have absolutely no doubt that there are some individuals who would eagerly partake of such an “opportunity.”

Let me here state that while I feel deep sympathy for those afflicted with SSA (what a heavy cross that would be! Of that, I have no doubt), I think that we do them (and society) an injustice when we try to normalize and justify practicing homosexuality.
Click to expand...
You’re right that is disturbing. My only wish, though, is that you wouldn’t synonymise “homosexuality”, with the sex act inwhich your above post clearly alludes to. Two intirely different things.
By the way that book should be thrown away.
 
Trueagape, I’ve read through over 100 posts hoping you’d get to an answer, and I don’t think you’ve given even one.

Are you saying that there is no Biblical condemnation of homosexuality? All of us “christians” believe there is, and doubtless, you have seen them all numerous times. Can you tell us where we’ve got it wrong, rather than just condemning us?
 
truagape, you seem to place a lot of weight on the fact that the Greek and Hebrew words translated (in some editions of the Bible) as “sodomite” actually bear no resemblance to the word “Sodom.”

But what does it matter? 1 Tim 1:10 clearly condemns homosexual activity.

According to Strong’s Talking Greek & Hebrew Dictionary, the Greek word used in that verse is arsenokoites, which means “a sodomite :- abuser of (that defile) self with mankind.”

As has been pointed out to you before, our Church does not condemn those with SSA.

Those who have SSA are called to lifelong celibacy, just like heteros who are never called to marriage. Both groups are “deprived” of sexual relationships. Both groups have that cross to bear. I have great compassion for both groups.

Now, I’d like to see you quote some Scriptures that specifically say homosexual activity is OK.

Ruthie
 
truagape said:
Do I reject Catholic Teaching? I think that any Christian will tell you that any teaching or theology that regects the clear language of the Word of God as preserved within the content and context of scripture should be rejected! And in regards to your comment about the history of the Church and the OT Jews, I don’t think you realize that I totally agree with you on that one. In fact it’s this indelible record of historic preservation that makes my case! When you study the laws of the OT Jews and compare them to the Laws as recorded all throughtout scripture, it becomes apparent why even Jesus, held some of the Jewish authorities in disposition. And when one studies the “catholic teaching” regarding the topic of homosexuality against the scriptural references regarding this “topic”, again a clear distinction inadvertantly arises. And any Christian who values TRUTH as preserved within the content and context of scripture, should hold anything contrary to those scriptures in contempt as well.
Click to expand...
So you admit that you reject Catholic teaching. That is between you and God and you will have to live with the outcome of that. You hold natural law in contempt. You hold the Catholic Church in contempt. You hold God’s word in contempt. You hold anyone who is not sympathetic to your “strange” desire to justify immoral behaviour and accept illicit behavior in contempt . You hold rational dialog in contempt. You even hold your own intellect to contempt by stubbornly refusing to see the crystal clear and consistent condemnation in scripture of homosexual practices. None of this contempt bodes well for you being able to have any positive influence or sway anyone in these forums.

So, can you be so kind as to state why you are here and what you hope to accomplish as an anti-Catholic who has just alienated himself from perhaps everyone here? Or do you hope to accomplish nothing more than play the role of a cyber troll-spoiler and bog everyone down in the morass of your gay agenda and bring these forum discussions down to the sewer?

Again, I invite you to find some self-respect, start acting like an adult and stop the rant against common sense and the truth.

James
 
truagape said:
You’re right that is disturbing. My only wish, though, is that you wouldn’t synonymise “homosexuality”, with the sex act inwhich your above post clearly alludes to. Two intirely different things.
Click to expand...
Actually, I did specifically differentiate between SSA (the attraction itself) and practicing homosexuality (i.e., acting upon the attraction). Please take another look at my post and you’ll see what I mean. 🙂
truagape said:
By the way that book should be thrown away.
Click to expand...
It was a library book, long since returned. 😉 There were some other good stories in the collection, but that one was truly horrific.

By the way, thank you for the charitable tone of your reply (I mean that sincerely). 👍 I know this is a thorny topic, certainly not the easiest one to discuss.
 
Morwenna said:
Actually, I did specifically differentiate between SSA (the attraction itself) and practicing homosexuality (i.e., acting upon the attraction). Please take another look at my post and you’ll see what I mean. 🙂

It was a library book, long since returned. 😉 There were some other good stories in the collection, but that one was truly horrific.

By the way, thank you for the charitable tone of your reply (I mean that sincerely). 👍 I know this is a thorny topic, certainly not the easiest one to discuss.
Click to expand...
Thank you, I appreciate that! And you’re right, this isn’t an easy topic to discuss. I re-read your post and I’m still comming to the same conclusion. You still synonymise “homosexuality” with the sex at in which your original post alludes to. “Practicing homosexuals”, and the sex act described in your post are not the same thing. In fact, the act your post described can even be performed by a heterosexual couple! Would you then want to refer to this act as “practicing heterosexuals”? It’s also worth noting that it’s only with female “homosexuality” where such an act isn’t even possible. 🙂
 
CentralFLJames said:
So you admit that you reject Catholic teaching. That is between you and God and you will have to live with the outcome of that. You hold natural law in contempt. You hold the Catholic Church in contempt. You hold God’s word in contempt. You hold anyone who is not sympathetic to your “strange” desire to justify immoral behaviour and accept illicit behavior in contempt . You hold rational dialog in contempt. You even hold your own intellect to contempt by stubbornly refusing to see the crystal clear and consistent condemnation in scripture of homosexual practices. None of this contempt bodes well for you being able to have any positive influence or sway anyone in these forums.

So, can you be so kind as to state why you are here and what you hope to accomplish as an anti-Catholic who has just alienated himself from perhaps everyone here? Or do you hope to accomplish nothing more than play the role of a cyber troll-spoiler and bog everyone down in the morass of your gay agenda and bring these forum discussions down to the sewer?

Again, I invite you to find some self-respect, start acting like an adult and stop the rant against common sense and the truth.

James
Click to expand...
I don’t know what truagape hopes to accomplish either. He’s been shown the error of his ways over and over. After showing him the error of his ways, all we can do is pray for him.

Does he really think that the Catholic Church is going to change it’s stance on homosexuality being a gravely disordered condition and homosexual acts being grave matter for sin?

Does he want us to give him our blessing - Go forth and sin some more, we will all pretend that your sin is not a sin and everyone will be happy?

Does he think anything he posts on these message boards is going to have any bearing on the Church’s unchanging and infallible teachings on homosexuality?

As I said before, all we can do is show him the error of his ways and pray for him. And not let him spew his nonsense unchallenged lest some unformed and impressionable soul reads what he says on here and starts to doubt the truth.
 
truagape said:
Thank you, I appreciate that! And you’re right, this isn’t an easy topic to discuss. I re-read your post and I’m still comming to the same conclusion. You still synonymise “homosexuality” with the sex at in which your original post alludes to. “Practicing homosexuals”, and the sex act described in your post are not the same thing. In fact, the act your post described can be even performed by a heterosexual couple! Would you then want to refer to this act as “practicing heterosexuals”? It’s also worth noting that it’s only with female “homosexuality” where such an act isn’t even possible. 🙂
Click to expand...
Truagape, its clear you are extremely focused on the “gay thing” and know every subtle semantic associated with the behaviours and characterization of it but you really are just completely obsessed with splitting semantic hairs. It’s clear here that kindhearted pandering to your perspective and sensitivity is not even good enough for you - you want to dominate this topic and permeate it with every aspect of your own ideas about it. It is clear that everyone here knows the difference between the proclivity and the act. We don’t need you to turn a biblical discussion into a street lesson on gay terminology and issues. And its really time for you to “come out” and recognize that no matter how you want to split very fine and irrelevant semantic hairs - you can’t in anyway justify same sex sexual relations. Get it? Scripture condems it, the church condemns it and even nature condemns it. It’s a really straight forward issue - its not licit. So move on and if you can’t deal with it go talk to a counselor and/or a priest. There is a lot more to life than just our sexual relations. And if you are single then you should be celibate anyway irrespective of what you think your inclinations are.

James
 
Just for the record, I am single and am celibate. And as I’ve said once before on these forums, I am a virgin in every sense of the word. Never been kissed, in a relationship, or even romantically cuddled. So lest one get any wild ideas about where I’m comming from, let the facts as they are, remain unaltered.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top