Why Must We Fight Against Same-Sex Marriage?

[tonyinatl66]

Tony,

I do not believe in going to the Bible for my answers. I go to the Church for answers. The Bible was birthed by the Church and the Church says homosexsuality is a sin. Protestants go to the Bible and here is one Protestant that disagrees with you…

gotquestions.org/homosexuality-Bible.html

Are you sure that the Bible says nothing about homosexuality as sin?

Yes, I am. Not all Churches say homosexuality is a sin.

1 John 4:1 ESV
Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world.

Timothy 3:13 ESV
While evil people and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived.

Ephesians 6:11 ESV
Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the schemes of the devil.

Corinthians 11:13-14 ESV
For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light.

God warns us about relying on others to learn his word.

Good luck with that.

 

[CopticChristian]

That is fine if it is aberrant sexual behavior for you, then don’t practice it and enjoy your life. Just know your beliefs are yours and not God’s. The Bible teaches us what is aberrant behavior. Not all Catholics or Catholic Churchs have the same beliefs.

Tony,

All Catholics and all Catholic Churches have the same beliefs. I will agree that some do not get the message. You claim to know the mind of God and your bible and mine say that the Holy Spirit searches the mind of God and the manifold wisdom of God is known through the Church…not the Bible. The Bible says that the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth. So is it true that homosexuality is aberrant behavior? The OHCAC says it is. You need to find an authority that you can accept as agreeing that it is not. This is Catholic Answers and on this site homosexuality is aberrant behavior. Homosexuals are people, God’s children, however their behavior is aberrant.

 

[CopticChristian]

Yes, I am. Not all Churches say homosexuality is a sin.

1 John 4:1 ESV
Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world.

Timothy 3:13 ESV
While evil people and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived.

Ephesians 6:11 ESV
Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the schemes of the devil.

Corinthians 11:13-14 ESV
For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light.

God warns us about relying on others to learn his word.

Good luck with that.

Tony,

So you are going to deny that the OHCAC says that homosexual behavior is sin. Protestants say Homosexual behavior is sin and you want to string together bible verses out of context. You believe that putting these verses together mean something that pertains to homosexsuality. Explain this.

 

[tonyinatl66]

Tony,

All Catholics and all Catholic Churches have the same beliefs. I will agree that some do not get the message. You claim to know the mind of God and your bible and mine say that the Holy Spirit searches the mind of God and the manifold wisdom of God is known through the Church…not the Bible. The Bible says that the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth. So is it true that homosexuality is aberrant behavior? The OHCAC says it is. You need to find an authority that you can accept as agreeing that it is not. This is Catholic Answers and on this site homosexuality is aberrant behavior. Homosexuals are people, God’s children, however their behavior is aberrant.

I never claimed to know the mind of God, but I do know God.

There is only one Church. In your mind, homosexuality may be aberrant behavior, and that is fine.

Bible teaches that it is Scripture that is to be used as measuring stick to determine truth from error. In Galatians 1:8-9, Paul states that it is not WHO teaches but WHAT is being taught that is to be used to determine truth from error. While the Roman Catholic Church continues to pronounce a curse to hell, or “anathema,” upon those who would reject the authority of the pope, Scripture reserves that curse for those who would teach a different gospel (Galatians 1:8-9).

While we in the Roman Catholic Church sees apostolic succession as logically necessary in order for God to unerringly guide the church, Scripture states that God has provided for His church through the following:

Infallible Scripture, (Acts 20:32; 2 Timothy 3:15-17; Matthew 5:18; John 10:35; Acts 17:10-12; Isaiah 8:20; 40:8; etc.) Note: Peter speaks of Paul’s writings in the same category as other Scripture (2 Peter 3:16),

Christ’s unending high-priesthood in heaven (Hebrews 7:22-28),

The provision of the Holy Spirit who guided the apostles into truth after Christ’s death (John 16:12-14), who gifts believers for the work of the ministry, including teaching (Romans 12:3-8; Ephesians 4:11-16), and who uses the written word as His chief tool (Hebrews 4:12; Ephesians 6:17).

While there have been good (humanly speaking) and moral men who have served as pope of the Roman Catholic Church, including Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI, the Roman Catholic Church teaching about the office of the pope should be rejected because it is not “in continuity” with the teachings of the original church related to us in the New Testament. This comparison of any church’s teaching is essential, lest we miss the New Testament’s teaching concerning the gospel, and not only miss eternal life in heaven ourselves, but unwittingly lead others down the wrong path (Galatians 1:8-9).

Again, God gave you a brain, it would do you good to use it. If you see a wrong, work to fix it.

 

[tonyinatl66]

Tony,

So you are going to deny that the OHCAC says that homosexual behavior is sin. Protestants say Homosexual behavior is sin and you want to string together bible verses out of context. You believe that putting these verses together mean something that pertains to homosexsuality. Explain this.

Just because someone else says something is so, doesn’t mean you should blindly follow. The Bible verses have nothing to do with any sexual behavior. Again, you misunderstand what they mean. They are a warning not to follow blindly and seek God’s truth.

 

[eternalrest]

I say that because christians are trying to ban it despite other cultures allowing same-sex marriages.
Marriage is not a creation of christianity so why should they decide who can marry?
Most of the anti-same-sex messages I have read contain “against my religion”, if that isn’t a group trying to claim authority on marriage then what is?

" The requirement for a marriage license was used as a mechanism to prohibit whites from marrying blacks, mulattos, Japanese, Chinese, Native Americans, Mongolians, Malays or Filipinos."
-wikipedia on u.s. marriage license

Marriage licenses used as a form of racism…now used against gays/lesbians… We have progressed so much!
(Kindle fires are a pain when copying and pasting.)

It is absolutely ridiculous to compare interracial and same-sex marriage. Catholics have been supporting interracial marriage for centuries, check the Queen of Sheba (from Africa) in Song of Solomon to St. Augustine of Hippo one of the Church fathers with a mother from Africa, a white father or St. Martin of Porres. In fact, the first court to overturn laws against interracial marriage in the United States were in California, Perez vs. Sharp, because of “religious freedom” for the Catholic Church which did not prohibit interracial marriage. Now, the Catholic Church was the #1 leader in overturning laws against interracial marriage but is the #1 leader in fighting same-sex marriage. What does that tell you about the differences between these two sorts of marriage?

Rather it is the opposite. Just like alleged Christians have sought to change the laws of God to fit their man-made ideologies, such as the establishment of the Church of England to allow divorce, and then pretend this is what God would have wanted or allowed so do alleged Christians now pretend that the Bible would allow same-sex marriage.

 

[surritter]

Sex serves much more than a biological function of reproduction. What a sad unfulfilled relationship that would be. I would encourage you to learn the ancient text. The Bible never says homosexuality in a committed relationship is a sin. Idolatry, rape, incest, etc, yes, the Bible explains they are wrong.

Re-read my post; I didn’t say that sex serves only as a biological function of reproduction. What I said – and what Christians of every stripe believed for centuries – is that we cannot intentionally divorce the different aspects of sex, thus cheapening the entire act.

 

[tonyinatl66]

It is absolutely ridiculous to compare interracial and same-sex marriage. Catholics have been supporting interracial marriage for centuries, check the Queen of Sheba (from Africa) in Song of Solomon to St. Augustine of Hippo one of the Church fathers with a mother from Africa, a white father or St. Martin of Porres. In fact, the first court to overturn laws against interracial marriage in the United States were in California, Perez vs. Sharp, because of “religious freedom” for the Catholic Church which did not prohibit interracial marriage. Now, the Catholic Church was the #1 leader in overturning laws against interracial marriage but is the #1 leader in fighting same-sex marriage. What does that tell you about the differences between these two sorts of marriage?

Rather it is the opposite. Just like alleged Christians have sought to change the laws of God to fit their man-made ideologies, such as the establishment of the Church of England to allow divorce, and then pretend this is what God would have wanted or allowed so do alleged Christians now pretend that the Bible would allow same-sex marriage.

It wasn’t until 1967 that the Supreme Court struck down remaining restrictions on interracial marriage then being enforced by some twenty states.

 

[NeedImprovement]

. . . continuation)

Meth Use Fuels Higher Rates of Unsafe Sex, HIV Risk in Young Men Who Have Sex With Men

natap.org/2007/HIV/082807_01.htm

**Research Says **HIV-Positive Men at Higher Risk for Meth Use

BCCFE studies show that 8 out of 10 times, these men began using crystal after they had acquired HIV infection. Centre studies conducted with the British Columbia Centre for Disease Control also show that B.C.'s HIV rates among gay men increased 50 percent in 2000 and have not declined since. . . .

Some of the recent posts on this thread border on the delusional, and would be much more at home out in a pasture , in a location where the bulls have been known to nourish the vegetation with a particular fertilizer.

That God could somehow approve of a lifestyle that brings so much sickness and anguish to those who practice it, (as evidenced in the quotes above) does not speak very eloquently of His love . It would be more aptly subscribing to the god of self-indulgence. Moreover, transmitting HIV to a fellow human being definitely falls outside and beyond the category of “do unto others”, doesn’t it ! ? It would actually appear to be a transgression of the commandment “Thou shalt not kill.”

Jesus’ words were [Mat 5:28] But I say to you, everyone who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Why would anyone think that the same doesn’t apply to those men troubled enough to lust after other men ?

 

[NeedImprovement]

The common argument from gay militants (and some of their minions/sympathizers) is that Levitivus 18:22 never really referred to “a man laying with a man” . (They also try to mislead people into believing the error that the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah was inhospitality - not homosexuality yet, as I read from one writer : there is probably not too much which is more inhospitable than homosexual gang rape] )

Returning to **Chapter 18 of Leviticus **, the refutation is right there , clear as water, in verses 6 through 18 where the laws were formulated as directed to the male Israelites.

If a man laying with a man had ever been considered as natural behaviour, condoned by God , then God would have laid out all the conditions where a man laying with a man would have been considered unlawful - as he did with the women in verses 6 through 18. But he never mentions men with men anywhere. Here it is verse for verse:

**Leviticus 18:6-18 **

Speaking to the male Israelites

God said:

**

"None of you shall approach a close relative to have sexual intercourse with her. I am the LORD.

You shall not disgrace your father by having intercourse with your mother. Besides, since she is your own mother, you shall not have intercourse with her.

You shall not have intercourse with your father’s wife, for that would be a disgrace to your father.

You shall not have intercourse with your sister, your father’s daughter or your mother’s daughter, whether she was born in your own household or born elsewhere.

You shall not have intercourse with your son’s daughter or with your daughter’s daughter, for that would be a disgrace to your own family.

You shall not have intercourse with the daughter whom your father’s wife bore to him, since she, too, is your sister.

You shall not have intercourse with your father’s sister, since she is your father’s relative.

You shall not have intercourse with your mother’s sister, since she is your mother’s relative.

You shall not disgrace your father’s brother by being intimate with his wife, since she, too, is your aunt.

You shall not have intercourse with your daughter-in-law; she is your son’s wife, and therefore you shall not disgrace her.

You shall not have intercourse with your brother’s wife, for that would be a disgrace to your brother.

You shall not have intercourse with a woman and also with her daughter, nor shall you marry and have intercourse with her son’s daughter or her daughter’s daughter; this would be shameful, because they are related to her.

While your wife is still living you shall not marry her sister as her rival; for thus you would disgrace your first wife. " **

If there had ever been any legitimacy in God’s eyes of a man laying with another man - all the illegitimate cases would have been spelled out here, as they were for a man having intercourse with a woman . But there’s nothing in scripture at all which condones the depraved thinking that a man *having intercourse * with another man under any conditions, is something which God would approve of it.

:dts:

 

[Stephen168]

Hate used to be the way homosexuality was diagnosed.

What does that mean?

Now, with modern science, shown to us by God, most of us know homosexuality is not a disorder.

When did God show science that homosexuality was ordered? And what is it ordered toward? And would this included heterosexuality, pedophilia, or incest? If not, how? If so, how?

 

[CopticChristian]

Hate used to be the way homosexuality was diagnosed. Now, with modern science, shown to us by God, most of us know homosexuality is not a disorder.

Tony,

You exhibit disordered thinking. Hate, you say was the way homosexuality was diagnosed. Actually if you make a study of the DSM, you will see it was diagnosed by committee. It was not until homosexual psychiatrists leaned on the DSM writers to remove the diagonsis of homosexuality from the DSM. The diagnosis was placed by committee and removed by corercion and a committee.

Homosexuality is not a disorder according to the DSM however most of us know that homosexuality is aberrant.

 

[CopticChristian]

I never claimed to know the mind of God, but I do know God.

There is only one Church. In your mind, homosexuality may be aberrant behavior, and that is fine.

Bible teaches that it is Scripture that is to be used as measuring stick to determine truth from error. In Galatians 1:8-9, Paul states that it is not WHO teaches but WHAT is being taught that is to be used to determine truth from error. While the Roman Catholic Church continues to pronounce a curse to hell, or “anathema,” upon those who would reject the authority of the pope, Scripture reserves that curse for those who would teach a different gospel (Galatians 1:8-9).

While we in the Roman Catholic Church sees apostolic succession as logically necessary in order for God to unerringly guide the church, Scripture states that God has provided for His church through the following:

Infallible Scripture, (Acts 20:32; 2 Timothy 3:15-17; Matthew 5:18; John 10:35; Acts 17:10-12; Isaiah 8:20; 40:8; etc.) Note: Peter speaks of Paul’s writings in the same category as other Scripture (2 Peter 3:16),

Christ’s unending high-priesthood in heaven (Hebrews 7:22-28),

The provision of the Holy Spirit who guided the apostles into truth after Christ’s death (John 16:12-14), who gifts believers for the work of the ministry, including teaching (Romans 12:3-8; Ephesians 4:11-16), and who uses the written word as His chief tool (Hebrews 4:12; Ephesians 6:17).

While there have been good (humanly speaking) and moral men who have served as pope of the Roman Catholic Church, including Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI, the Roman Catholic Church teaching about the office of the pope should be rejected because it is not “in continuity” with the teachings of the original church related to us in the New Testament. This comparison of any church’s teaching is essential, lest we miss the New Testament’s teaching concerning the gospel, and not only miss eternal life in heaven ourselves, but unwittingly lead others down the wrong path (Galatians 1:8-9).

Again, God gave you a brain, it would do you good to use it. If you see a wrong, work to fix it.

Tony,

You are of a Protestant mind set ignoring that the Bible no where teaches that the Bible is the rule of faith. If you believe that there is another gospel being preached by Catholics please tell me what your gospel is.

The gospel is that through Christ, through the Church we are made fellow heirs, by grace through faith working in love. This is the gospel.

Now considering your notion of the brain you have to have a model of the brain that can be tested and serves all with a brain that now how to use it. I suggest your spend some time with L. Michael Hall, Users Manual of the Brain Vol I & II. In short this will introduce you to the meta model of the brain that works quite well when tested.

Your display of emotion/thought is consistent with the meta model. No thought comes without an emotion and no emotion comes without a thought.

What makes our brain work is one thing. It is called self reflective thinking. If you are not sure as to how this works let me refer you to another source, also by L. Michael Hall. Reading this book will give you insights as to how your brain works…try reading “Secrets of Personal Mastery”. It is great for an understanding of how our brain functions. Since you suggested I use my brain more I shall.

Homosexuality is neutral as it happens until I give it meaning and I have. It is registered in my mind as aberrant behavior. In your mind it registers differently because you have some other meaning attached to this. That is you and this is me.

 

[CopticChristian]

Just because someone else says something is so, doesn’t mean you should blindly follow. The Bible verses have nothing to do with any sexual behavior. Again, you misunderstand what they mean. They are a warning not to follow blindly and seek God’s truth.

Tony,

Do you not read? 1Corinthians 6:9 and following says this…

9Or 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, 10nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. 11Such 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

In the Greek, found here the word is…arsenokoitai

found here

interlinearbible.org/1_corinthians/6-9.htm

733 [e]
arsenokoitai
ἀρσενοκοῖται ,
homosexuals
N-NMP

Homosexual behavior does not merit the Kingdom of Heaven…

and when you read Romans…1:26

26For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.

Degrading passions, natural for unnatural, indecent acts, error…Paul speaks of Homosexuality in a negative way as well.

What Bible are you reading? Maybe that is your problem.

 

[tonyinatl66]

Tony,

Do you not read? 1Corinthians 6:9 and following says this…

In the Greek, found here the word is…arsenokoitai

found here

interlinearbible.org/1_corinthians/6-9.htm

733 [e]
arsenokoitai
ἀρσενοκοῖται ,
homosexuals
N-NMP

Homosexual behavior does not merit the Kingdom of Heaven…

and when you read Romans…1:26

Degrading passions, natural for unnatural, indecent acts, error…Paul speaks of Homosexuality in a negative way as well.

What Bible are you reading? Maybe that is your problem.

I would encourge you to learn the meaning of arsenoloitai. It does not mean homosexual. Unfortunately that word really has no meaning. It is not really understood what Paul means by that word. It has only been used two or three time in all of history. A rough translation mean man-bed. Paul speaks of heterosexual and homosexual sex as being bad in situtations like rape, incest, and in false worshiping to false Gods.

 

[CopticChristian]

I would encourge you to learn the meaning of arsenoloitai. It does not mean homosexual. Unfortunately that word really has no meaning. It is not really understood what Paul means by that word. It has only been used two or three time in all of history. A rough translation mean man-bed. Paul speaks of heterosexual and homosexual sex as being bad in situtations like rape, incest, and in false worshiping to false Gods.

Tony,

Your mind has filters. Those filters are generalization, deletion and distortion. You have deleted what Paul says, you distort what is known and come to your own conclusions that you want others to accept. Many of these filters operate without effort, they are just part of our thinking. You are actively doing this suggesting that your inability to accept reality is a higher order of thinking related to thoughts formed by conscious decsion and not related to reality. Your insults are indicative of weak convictions due to your inability to accurately come to terms with reality.

You may want to spend some time with Dr. William Glasser and read, “Reality Therapy” and “Choice Theory”. You are making choices and not spending much time in reality.

Good luck with your agenda to prove to others what you want them to accept. I believe that your convictions are weak, looking for confirmation by others to no avail.

Homosexuality is sin.

Homosexuality is aberrant behavior.

Homosexuals are God’s children.

Their behavior is an abomination.

If you are a homosexual I will pray for you.

You are incorrigible.

 

[CopticChristian]

I would encourge you to learn the meaning of arsenoloitai. It does not mean homosexual. Unfortunately that word really has no meaning. It is not really understood what Paul means by that word. It has only been used two or three time in all of history. A rough translation mean man-bed. Paul speaks of heterosexual and homosexual sex as being bad in situtations like rape, incest, and in false worshiping to false Gods.

Tony,

Alfred Korzybski wrote “Science and Sanity”, “Manhood of Humanity” and more. He formulated the term…“the map is not the territory”, in other words what is in your mind, my mind is a representation of the world out there and many maps are distorted, incomplete, etc. Maps dictate our behavior and understanding. Maps change and as a result our thinking and behavior change.

Your map of homosexuality should include what is known in time. That is a premise that Korzybski presented. Humanity can “time bind” or bring information from the past to the present to complete our maps and make us “sane”…he coined the term “unsane”. Unsanity results from distorted and incomplete maps.

I suggest you and anyone trying to promote a homosexual agenda realize that it is not a problem with Catholic Answers. It is a problem with the world.

religionfacts.com/homosexuality/index.htm

The above link will take you to religion facts. At the bottom of the page under “General”…Take a look at the timeline of Homosexuality. It is what it is. Reality and history cannot be changed.

Next look at comparison charts of homosexuality and religion.

religionfacts.com/homosexuality/comparison_chart.htm

at the above link. You will discover that the world religions have a problem with homosexuality, hence your problem becomes change the world or change your mind. For your information, John the Baptist, said repent…however…that means change your mind.

You will discover that you problem is not with Catholic answers, not with Christianity…you have a problem convincing the world that what you believe needs attention. Sadly this is an agenda that will only bring you frustration…

Tony vs The World

I suggest you adjust your internal map of the world according to reality and cause yourself less frustration.

Change you mind, as John the Baptist said, for the Kingdom of God is at hand…

 

[estesbob]

I would encourge you to learn the meaning of arsenoloitai. It does not mean homosexual. Unfortunately that word really has no meaning. It is not really understood what Paul means by that word. It has only been used two or three time in all of history. A rough translation mean man-bed. Paul speaks of heterosexual and homosexual sex as being bad in situtations like rape, incest, and in false worshiping to false Gods.

*Proposition 1. To broaden the word arsenokoitai to include exploitive heterosexual intercourse appears unlikely in view of the unqualified nature of the Levitical prohibitions.16
Proposition

1. In every instance in which the arsenokoit word group occurs in a context that offers clues as to its meaning (i.e., beyond mere inclusion in a vice list), it denotes homosexual intercourse.17

Proposition 3. The term arsenokoitai itself indicates an inclusive sense: all men who play the active role in homosexual intercourse. Had Paul intended to single out pederasts he could have used the technical term paiderastïs.18

Proposition 4. The meaning that Paul gave to arsenokoitai has to be unpacked in light of Romans1:24-27. When Paul speaks of the sexual intercourse of “males with males” (arsenes en arsenes) in v.27, he obviously has in mind arsenokoitai.19*

equip.org/articles/is-arsenokoitai-really-that-mysterious/

 

[CopticChristian]

*Proposition 1. To broaden the word arsenokoitai to include exploitive heterosexual intercourse appears unlikely in view of the unqualified nature of the Levitical prohibitions.16
Proposition

1. In every instance in which the arsenokoit word group occurs in a context that offers clues as to its meaning (i.e., beyond mere inclusion in a vice list), it denotes homosexual intercourse.17

Proposition 3. The term arsenokoitai itself indicates an inclusive sense: all men who play the active role in homosexual intercourse. Had Paul intended to single out pederasts he could have used the technical term paiderastïs.18

Proposition 4. The meaning that Paul gave to arsenokoitai has to be unpacked in light of Romans1:24-27. When Paul speaks of the sexual intercourse of “males with males” (arsenes en arsenes) in v.27, he obviously has in mind arsenokoitai.19*

equip.org/articles/is-arsenokoitai-really-that-mysterious/

Bob,

This is a fascinating example of looking back today to discern yesterday without looking at yesterday and the effects of what was taught. The history of bans on homosexual behavior are seen outside the writings of the Bible and are based on OT Judaism and NT Christianity. It is clear that the old timers understood what is debated and confused today.

That is why so many want that old time religion.

 

[estesbob]

Bob,

This is a fascinating example of looking back today to discern yesterday without looking at yesterday and the effects of what was taught. The history of bans on homosexual behavior are seen outside the writings of the Bible and are based on OT Judaism and NT Christianity. It is clear that the old timers understood what is debated and confused today.

That is why so many want that old time religion.

Tony asks us to rely only on his personal interpretation of scripture., ignore any verses that contradict his views and ignore 4,000 years of teaching and tradition concerning the sinfulness of homosexual behavior. When people create a god in their own image and likeness it should be of no surprise that that god shares every view they have