What if the Church's teaching on homosexuality is wrong?

[Ginger2]

When you write back I want a scientific study on your side, one that isn’t from the 17th century that you obviously come from. Prove to me that homosexuality is a choice, or that gay families all abuse their kids, something like that. And think out your next answer a bit more so that you actually sound like you can think critically.

It is not a choice in that a person wakes up one day and says, “I think I’ll be gay today, but I might change my mind tomorrow.”

There is plenty of valid research. But you will reject it because you are making a choice, not based on wanting to know the truth, but upon what you already believe.

Common sense has left the building where this issue is concern. Here’s an example.
A heterosexual man several years ago was reported to police by his neighbor when she looked out her window and saw him masterbating in front of his window which faced her house. He was prosecuted and sent to court ordered treatment.
Slightly more recently an aid of former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura was caught masturbating in the locker room at the YMCA - in plan sight. A man who had his young son with him called the police. All h@ll broke out that this was homophobia. and our governaor even said he the aid should never have been arrested as this was “a normal part of the homosexual lifestyle”

In other-words. public masterbation for heterosexuals in a crime and a mental disorder, but for homosexuals it is normal behavior!

Excuse me but the laws should apply equally to all.

 

[Ginger2]

… The Church could be incorrect in this teaching. There are a number of serious and reputable biblical scholars who would agree with that position.

So, who do we listen to these days, men or God?

Homosexuals suffer from conditions most of the heterosexual World has never even heard of because their lifestyle is so unhealthy.

If anyone was born that way it is a product of our fallen World not because God created them that way.

 

[Ginger2]

Our society is slowly but consistently moving toward normalizing peodaphelia.

An article in Psychological Bulletin (1998, Vol. 124, p. 22-53), states adult-adolescent sex may fall within the normal range of human sexual behaviors and indicates sexual abuse may not be “as harmful” as once thought.

Three doctors, . Dean Byrd, PhD American Fork, Utah; S. Brent Scharman, PhD Salt Lake City, Utah and Ed D. Lauritsen, PhD Phoenix, Ariz. wrote a letter protesting the publishing of this “research” stating that by publishing it the paper was giving credibility. These doctors all work with children who have been sexually moested and abused and they stated it always has harmful effects.

So much for your valid research. People pick and choose which research is valid based on the outcome they desire.

 

[Mumbles140]

I could not disagree with this more. Catholicism is VERY pessimistic about the human condition, and specifically the final destiny of mankind, all the while trying to dodge the issue with this talk about “everyone being predestined to heaven.” Here’s why.

So Catholics are exceptionally pessimistic by the fact that they believe in the possibility of someone so evil, that they choose hell forever.

See, I think it is optimistic that our Creator wills us all to go to Heaven. I think one can be optimistic, but still be a realist that the path to Heaven is narrow and difficult. And it is not like there is one single act that condemns a man to hell for eternity. Had things gone differently, Hitler could have realized his wrong, repented, confessed, and who knows - maybe he would have been in Heaven.

The only thing that condemns a man to Hell for eternity is willingly choosing to turn his back to God, and so God grants man what he wishes. Other than that, anyone need nearly to confess their sins and obtain God’s forgiveness. I can’t speak for you, I’m pretty optimistic about the amount of chances we are given to achieve salvation.

 

[FOFEBA]

So, who do we listen to these days, men or God?

Homosexuals suffer from conditions most of the heterosexual World has never even heard of because their lifestyle is so unhealthy.

If anyone was born that way it is a product of our fallen World not because God created them that way.

You listen to men, such as the pope, because God has not spoken to man for 2,000 years.

In spite of the disingenuous nature of your response, we must accept that we read the bible in translation. In other words, we read a document written by man thousands of years ago according to the contemporaneous knowledge and prejudices of the time.

Then, we translated those original writings through the filter of centuries later cultural and prejudicial context, based on the current understandings and cultural context.

Then, we take a centuries old, sometimes inaccurate, translation and we attempt to extrapolate that to modern life.

It would not be surprising that this game of “telephone” results in nonsense.

So, the answer is that you would be correct if we were dealing with the word of God. However, it is more likely that we are not than it is that we are. Therefore, the teachings are suspect and not to be trusted.

Of course, the only authority to contradict this view is the Church, who tells us that it is correct. However, this position is also suspect because it is self serving and it is not objective.

If God would actually speak to us, we might then know if the Church which is a human political institution is correct or not.

 

[Ginger2]

You listen to men, such as the pope, because God has not spoken to man for 2,000 years.

But you did not cite the pope in your post. You cited a priest and followe by saying “and the papal imprimatur was revoked” So I guess you’re not listening to the pope?
Or is it that you think I listen to the pope as an authority? LOL If that is so, my Catholic friends must be rolling on the floor with laughter!!!

In spite of the disingenuous nature of your response,…

Ahhh, another psychic who can see into a persons heart and know their motives.

So, the answer is that you would be correct if we were dealing with the word of God.

I am correct

QUOTE]

 

[Mumbles140]

Of course, the only authority to contradict this view is the Church, who tells us that it is correct. However, this position is also suspect because it is self serving and it is not objective.

If God would actually speak to us, we might then know if the Church which is a human political institution is correct or not.

I’m pretty certain that Jesus told Peter he was the rock upon which He would build His Church, and gave Peter the authority to carry on His teachings. So God did speak to us, and He told us that the Church is His institution, not a man-made political institution.

 

[slywakka250]

Mumbles140:

…And it is not like there is one single act that condemns a man to hell for eternity. Had things gone differently, Hitler could have realized his wrong, repented, confessed, and who knows - maybe he would have been in Heaven.

mortal sin effects a separation from God in a single act, sufficient to be a permanent separation from God. The Church clearly teaches that a single mortal sin (if it is really a mortal sin) always puts you in hell, (this is so by the definition of mortal sin. The definition of mortal sin, is a sin that separates your completely from God, so it can’t be the case that you commit mortal sin, and aren’t in hell, (if you died at that moment unrepentant).)

by the way, only God could tell us who (if anyone) is actually in hell, and God has not told us that Hitler is in hell.

Mumbles140:

The only thing that condemns a man to Hell for eternity is willingly choosing to turn his back to God, and so God grants man what he wishes. Other than that, anyone need nearly to confess their sins and obtain God’s forgiveness. I can’t speak for you, I’m pretty optimistic about the amount of chances we are given to achieve salvation.

To me, this issue has nothing to do with how many chances God gives us, or how easy or hard it is to get to heaven. The thing that matters most is the question.What is man’s true capacity for evil? just how evil can a man be?

we were discussing Buddhism and other more “optimistic” religions. These are the religions that don’t believe that man has the same capacity for evil which Catholicism believes man has. Buddhism and these other religions believe man as an eternal spirit can always choose to continue to spiritually progress, even if it takes millions of years or more. A man may make many wrong turns, and suffer a great great deal, but he is never doomed for eternity.

Catholicism states that man has the capacity for an evil so great, that man can actually position himself in eternal opposition to goodness, and that its quite possible that many many men through the ages actually do this! The magnitude of this evil (the eternal choice) is literally infinitely greater, then all the finite evil actions done in the Buddhist universe, or the universe of a more optimistic religion.

 

[FOFEBA]

FOFEBA;7079582:

You listen to men, such as the pope, because God has not spoken to man for 2,000 years.

But you did not cite the pope in your post. You cited a priest and followe by saying “and the papal imprimatur was revoked” So I guess you’re not listening to the pope?
Or is it that you think I listen to the pope as an authority? LOL If that is so, my Catholic friends must be rolling on the floor with laughter!!!

In spite of the disingenuous nature of your response,…

Ahhh, another psychic who can see into a persons heart and know their motives.

So, the answer is that you would be correct if we were dealing with the word of God.

I am correct

QUOTE]

You offer no evidence that you are correct, other than your own opinion that you are correct.

We know from history that the church has often been incorrect. The only evidence that we have that it is correct is that it tells us that it is correct.

This is all starting to get very fishy.

I suppose that we can apply the same standard to anyone who claims to be correct. I say I am correct, and therefore I must be correct.

The original poster on this thread poses the legitimate question, “what if the church is incorrect on this issue”

So far, nobody has directly answered his question other than to say that we must be correct because we claim that we are correct.

 

[Ginger2]

Ginger2;7079647:

You offer no evidence that you are correct, other than your own opinion that you are correct.
Whereas, you

have proven beyond a doubt, you are wrong. You accuse me of following the pope ANd even after I indicate that to be false, here you are again arguing with me against the authority of the pope.

I am not Catholic. The pope is nothing to me. I’m sure my Catholic friend are all holding their sides from laughing.

The original poster on this thread poses the legitimate question, “what if the church is incorrect on this issue”

Which I did answer just as the question was posed. You are wrong again! lol See post #348.
QUOTE]

 

[benedictus2]

Why is it that whenever the topic of gays comes up, people like you always bring out the pedophile line? PEDOPHILES HURT KIDS. How do gays hurt kids? Seriously I want an answer on that. Gays actually help kids in foster care, when gays are actually allowed to adopt. The couple completes their family, and the children get a loving home, away from the uncertainty of where they’ll go next and when. Of course you’ll refute this because you’re under the impression that all gays have fangs and drink baby blood or something… When you write back I want a scientific study on your side, one that isn’t from the 17th century that you obviously come from. Prove to me that homosexuality is a choice, or that gay families all abuse their kids, something like that. And think out your next answer a bit more so that you actually sound like you can think critically.

It says in your profile that you are Christian. Since when has Christian morality been limited to do no harm?

As a Christian, the determiner of morality is God not us.

The homosexual feelings may not be a choice but to act on those feelings and commit perverted sexual acts is.

 

[Ginger2]

First let me confess, I did not read 24 pages of responses. Also, I am not Catholic.

But, I would like to give my hypothetical answer to this hypothetical question:

I. hypotheically, the Church cannot be wrong on anything defined ex-cathedral

II. if the Church’s teaching is not absolute, and they are wrong in this instance,…
. a. there is still a beneficial service to be provided through their 12 steps to heterosexuality program because,
. . 1. the sector of the homosexual community who claim sexuality in inate and cannot be changed.state anyone who changes was never homosexual to begin with. What a wonderful service the Church provides in helping clear up confusion and get these pseudo-gays living the heterosexual life they are truly born to live!!!
. . 2. of the five original founders of Exodus International, only one reverted back to homosexuality. The other four successfully left the homosexual lifestyle. This transformation has lasted decades!!! So, again even if the Church is wrong, their 12 step program can provide a wonderful, beneficial service for up to 80% of those who participate.

 

[benedictus2]

You listen to men, such as the pope, because God has not spoken to man for 2,000 years.

In spite of the disingenuous nature of your response, we must accept that we read the bible in translation. In other words, we read a document written by man thousands of years ago according to the contemporaneous knowledge and prejudices of the time.

Then, we translated those original writings through the filter of centuries later cultural and prejudicial context, based on the current understandings and cultural context.

Then, we take a centuries old, sometimes inaccurate, translation and we attempt to extrapolate that to modern life.

It would not be surprising that this game of “telephone” results in nonsense.

Rubbish! Translation of the Bible is not a game of telephone. You obviously have got no clue as to what goes into the translation of the Bible.

So, the answer is that you would be correct if we were dealing with the word of God. However, it is more likely that we are not than it is that we are. Therefore, the teachings are suspect and not to be trusted.

Of course, the only authority to contradict this view is the Church, who tells us that it is correct. However, this position is also suspect because it is self serving and it is not objective.

If God would actually speak to us, we might then know if the Church which is a human political institution is correct or not.

And you say you are a Christian?

Hey, just come out and proclaim you are not one because everything you have written above just contradicts very basic Christian doctrines.

 

[benedictus2]

Whereas, you have proven beyond a doubt, you are wrong. You accuse me of following the pope

FOFEBA clearly have got no clue. Ginger following the Pope! If only. I must say I do pray for the day

 

[Ginger2]

…my question is, what if the church is wrong with their teaching on homosexuality?

… if [a] religion is wrong, does the moral system still work.

…how would you feel if you went to heaven and God said the church was wrong about homosexuality all along.

THIS IS A HYPOTHETICAL! DON’T ARGUE THAT IT IS WRONG AND GIVE ME REASONS FOR IT. THAT ISN’T THE QUESTION. IF YOU CAN’T POSSIBLY IMAGINE THIS HYPOTHETICAL THEN DON’T RESPOND ABOUT HOW THE TEACHING IS TRUE BECAUSE IT ADDS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO THE DISCUSSION.

This the Original Post…just thought I would remind everyone as some of us seem to want to argue other topics here.

This is a hypothetical question, so people arguing the idea that homosexuality is immutable are OFF TOPIC. People arguing the authority of the RC are also OFF TOPIC.

The hypothetical is “if a religion is wrong on an issue, does that error effect the morality system of that religion?”

A second part that is implied, but not specifically stated in the OP, is whether or not being wrong on homosexuality is harmful. The OP doesn’t ask this, but I think he/she intends it to be a part of the question.

 

[Ginger2]

To answer the OP, directly

hypothetically,** if a religion is wrong on an issue, does that error effect the morality system of that religion**

YES, if the religion reshapes their moral code based upon the error (which is usually the case in real-life)

NO, not if the religion follows their moral code in dealing with the unrealized error

 

[neophyte]

neophyte:

bingbang:

What if the Church’s teaching on homosexuality is wrong?

Then Jesus is not God, he is not raised form the dead, and our faith is in vain.
Not necessarily, but likely. Yes, this is sorta what I am getting at.

I see no way of arriving at any other conclusion. Jesus promised that his Church would never teach false doctrine, so if the teaching is wrong then Jesus failed in his promise… which means he can’t be God.

 

[benedictus2]

I see no way of arriving at any other conclusion. Jesus promised that his Church would never teach false doctrine, so if the teaching is wrong then Jesus failed in his promise… which means he can’t be God.

Which means we are all doomed including bigbang.

 

[Ginger2]

“…how would you feel if you went to heaven and God said the church was wrong about homosexuality all along?”

I’d say, “I tried to tell them, Lord, but you know how stubborn those Catholics can be.”

 

[Ginger2]

…what if the church is wrong about their teaching on homosexuality.

Irrelevent. God is still right!