Why should marriage be preserved for a man and a woman?

  • Thread starter Thread starter tonyrey
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
That is my view and Jesus’s view, because He said "“Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law until all is fulfilled” (Matthew 5:17-18 ).

I would rather stick with Jesus’ and Bible’s view, than any other view.
It seems that various interpretations of the above have been a source for a great amount of division in how the old testament is to be interpreted. The various groups applying their interpretation seem to all feel that they are, to put it as you worded it, “stick[ing] with Jesus’s and the Bible’s view.*”
    • technical note, the bible being a collection of documents doesn’t itself have a view. The readers and writers of bibles have views, but these views may not be compatible with each other.
 
St. Paul remained a celebate male, and even, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, encouraged others to be so ( 1 Cor 7:1-9)

Do you consider the words of Christ and the Holy Spirit to be at odds?
So we have Jesus and Paul and Deutronomy saying and doing things at different times which are at odds. What matters is whether they are done out of love or hate.
Everything is O.K if it is done out of LOVE, because with the Redeeming Sacrificial Death of Jesus on the cross, all LAWS were abolished.
 
St. Paul remained a celebate male, and even, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, encouraged others to be so ( 1 Cor 7:1-9)

Do you consider the words of Christ and the Holy Spirit to be at odds?
If we all did as Paul encouraged then Christianity would die out within a generation due to a complete absence of babies.

It seems unlikely that’s what Christ wants. More likely Paul got that one wrong or we read him wrong.
 
  • technical note, the bible being a collection of documents doesn’t itself have a view. The readers and writers of bibles have views, but these views may not be compatible with each other.
That’s a scurrilous remark! :eek:

They certainly are compatible, it’s just no one has ever agreed how. 😃
 
If we all did as Paul encouraged then Christianity would die out within a generation due to a complete absence of babies.

It seems unlikely that’s what Christ wants. More likely Paul got that one wrong or we read him wrong.
 
CopticChristian;10805822:
So far so good, men and women have parts with a purpose and some choose to use them and some choose not to use them:thumbsup:
It is not illegal. What does this have to do with anything?
If it is not illegal for friars and nuns to keep their genitals without procreating, why should it be a sin for homosexuals?
You appear to be confused. What does legal vs not legal have to do with morality. Abortion is legal. Does this make it moral? Sin is based on acting in opposition to revealed truth concerning morality. Do you believe that it is moral to act homosexually?
Gay men and women are just like priests? No they are not. They do not live in cloister and cannot offer the Sacraments.
Celibacy and living in a cloister are not necessary conditions for offering sacraments. There are many orthodox priests who are married. What is the minimum number of inmates that are required to make a cloister? Will two inmates not make a cloister?
Gay men and women are not dedicated to morality. Nuns and priests are dedicated to morality. It matter not how many there are, it is their intention in their actions. Do you disagree?
Living together with a bit more intimacy and loving? So then you believe that gay people acting sexually immoral, living together, please do not pull the “this is a celibate homosexual couple”…are closer to intimacy than someone that lives dedicating their life to God?
Some people say that gay people are immoral, and do not love God
Some others say that people who eat pork or meat of any animal with cloven hooves are sinners.
Some others think that those who work on Sundays will go to Hell.
All the above activities are against Bible teaching
Different people have different opinions, Some are obsessed with one law, but ignore all others. Even Jesus was not able to live satisfying all kinds of people in the world.
Jesus said, everything is O.K, as long as you love others like you love yourselves, and Keep God above everything else in your life.
We are not Christians of the Bible alone, or have you forgotten that Orthodox are people of the Bible/Tradition and Catholics are as well. We believe in Church teaching. What do you believe in?
Because, usually indicates a reason and should make sense however you say because they are just like priests and nuns, and they are not then you conclude that they should adopt children.
What I said was that, since a homosexual couple are only two people, it may not be practical for them to run a geriatric home or orphanage like the friars who live in larger cloisters with more members. But they may be allowed to keep one or two old people or home-less children.
Why do you argue for Homosexuality. Do you struggle with homosexuality?
Have you seen what the Orthodox say about Homosexuality?
Even Orthodox laws should change with the times.
Is it true that you believe Morality is not fixed, is fluid and can change?
 
So we have Jesus and Paul and Deutronomy saying and doing things at different times which are at odds. What matters is whether they are done out of love or hate.
Everything is O.K if it is done out of LOVE, because with the Redeeming Sacrificial Death of Jesus on the cross, all LAWS were abolished.
It is clear that you have swallowed the pill of the argument for Homosexual behavior that is called…

Social Construct…

the other of course is

Essentialism…

May I ask do you believe that Homosexuals are created and born Homosexual.
 
"Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”
Amen!
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” (I John 4:1 ).
Amen!
If a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand.
True. 👍
The Second Vatican Council (1963-5) was not intended to be an infallible doctrinal council but was conceived as a “pastoral” renewal of the Church to bring it into line with the Revolution of 1789. Paul VI admitted it to be a disaster.
Absolutely untrue.
For proof, you can go through the addresses of Popes John XXIII († 1963) and Paul VI († 1978) at the opening and closing of the Council, as well as other material from Popes, cardinals and bishops.
Please give the texts, with quotations and citations. Something with “Vatican II turned out to be a disaster” would be helpful.
Paul VI again highlighted the non-infallible, non-definitive character of Vatican II in a general audience a year later.
Nope.
Any pronouncements by man or church or clergy or priest or nun should be congruent with the teachings of Jesus.
Finally, something that is very Catholic of you to say! 👍
Because Salvation and Jesus ( Word became Flesh) came to man through Jews does not imply that everything done by the Jews are or were correct. The Jews murdered Jesus who came to save them.
Similarly, Just because the Bible (Word became Book) was given to man by the Catholic Church does not mean that whatever they do or say anything cannot be questioned.
Then how do you know that what the Catholic Church said Jesus said is correct, tony?
What are your thoughts on the “smoke of satan” that Pope John XXIII spoke about at the beginning of V2?
Do you have your quotes wrong, tony? Please do your research before you post here.

Otherwise, please cite the quote from Pope John 23.

(Hint: it was not Pope John who is said to have coined that phrase.)
 
tonyfrancis21;10806975:
You appear to be confused. What does legal vs not legal have to do with morality. Abortion is legal. Does this make it moral? Sin is based on acting in opposition to revealed truth concerning morality. Do you believe that it is moral to act homosexually?
OK. I shall use the “moral” instead of “legal”.
Is it immoral for friars and nuns to not procreate?
Gay men and women are not dedicated to morality. Nuns and priests are dedicated to morality. It matter not how many there are, it is their intention in their actions. Do you disagree?
This is slander. Gay people can accuse you of immorality for calling them immoral.
You have to show why you think they are immoral, and why nuns and priests are moral.

We are not Christians of the Bible alone, or have you forgotten that Orthodox are people of the Bible/Tradition and Catholics are as well. We believe in Church teaching. What do you believe in?.
Just because I am an Indian does not mean that I have to approve of everything that happens in India, of what she says or does. If it were not so, no organisation will change with the times, and we would have been using horse cart and stones instead of airplanes and computers today. Even Jesus questioned anointed priests in his temple when He was just 12 years old. Are we not exhorted to follow Jesus?

(Matthew 10:34-36 ) - "Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. “For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household.”
(Luke 22:36 ) - "And He said to them, “But now, let him who has a purse take it along, likewise also a bag, and let him who has no sword sell his robe and buy one”

Why do you argue for Homosexuality. Do you struggle with homosexuality?
My argument is valid irrespective of whether I am a homosexual, or Orthodox or an African.

Is it true that you believe Morality is not fixed, is fluid and can change?
It depends on what you surmise as “moral”. Jesus has changed rules about marriage and adultery etc, during His human existence on earth. These are rules on morality, unlike road rules and legal rules and customs and manners, and dress codes which are different from place to place. I think you are confused about what are legal and what are moral.
 
Amen!

Then how do you know that what the Catholic Church said Jesus said is correct, tony?
Everything God has created in this world will crumble after its use is over. Has the church on earth completed its useful span of life, and started crumbling? Shouldn’t the placenta break for the child to be born?

Do you have your quotes wrong, tony? Please do your research before you post here.

Otherwise, please cite the quote from Pope John 23.

(Hint: it was not Pope John who is said to have coined that phrase.)

OK. Agreed., It can be Paul VI, not John XXIII, who said that the smoke of Satan had entered the Church.

In 1962 Pope John convened the Second Vatican Council with the excuse the Church needed modernization, or - as he called it - “aggiornamento.” He convinced himself that he would be the chosen prophet to launch this project of updating the Church. Probably because of this sweet illusion, he did not realize that behind his plan the trap of Satan was hiding.
What was the point at which John XXIII committed his fatal mistake?
His mistake was that he did not heed the advice of the Apostle St. John. He did not check out the spirit which brought him the so-called “inspiration.” St. John the Apostle in his first letter to the disciples gave an explicit warning regarding inspiration. He said:
Code:
 "Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God; because many false prophets have gone forth into the world.  By this is the spirit of God known: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, is of God.  And every spirit that severs Jesus, is not of God, but is of the Antichrist, of whom you have heard he is coming, and now is already in the world." (I Jn. 4, 1-3).
Paul VI said this on 29 June 1972 in a sermon for the 9th anniversary of his Coronation, “through some crack the smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God”.

But the crack is still there, even if it was announced by another Pope. I am bothered about the crack, and not about which Pope announced it.

Pope Francis, in an address, calls Traditionalists “STUBBORN, HARDHEADED, FOOLISH AND SLOW OF HEART.”
The Italian word the Holy Father used is “TESTARDI,” which is also Italian slang for Jackass !
He said" Vatican II “was a beautiful work of the Holy Spirit,” and yet, 50 years later, there is no “Church continuity”. There are “stubborn” members who even want to turn back and “tame the Holy Spirit.” Pope Francis took the opportunity to speak about the Council 50 years since it opened, inspired by the passage in the Acts of the Apostles that tells the story of Stephen who, before he was stoned, described as “stubborn” those who oppose the Holy Spirit.

One of these Popes has got to be fallible
 
If we all did as Paul encouraged then Christianity would die out within a generation due to a complete absence of babies.

It seems unlikely that’s what Christ wants. More likely Paul got that one wrong or we read him wrong.
:eek: You mean Paul made mistakes?? I wonder what else he got wrong…
 
One of these Popes has got to be fallible
Perhaps if you proffered what you* think* the charism of infallibility means, tony.

Do you think it means if the Pope says, “I think that brides should wear red!” that this falls under the charism of infallibility?

What about if a pope writes, “It is possible that purgatory is not an actual physical place”…does that fall under the charism of infallibility?

Please explain what you know regarding this Catholic teaching…for I fear that you are woefully misinformed about this. :sad_yes:
 
CopticChristian;10811714:
**Originally Posted by tonyfrancis21 **
You appear to be confused. What does legal vs not legal have to do with morality. Abortion is legal. Does this make it moral? Sin is based on acting in opposition to revealed truth concerning morality. Do you believe that it is moral to act homosexually?
OK. I shall use the “moral” instead of “legal”.
Is it immoral for friars and nuns to not procreate?
Tony. Is it moral to act homosexually, yes or no.
Gay men and women are not dedicated to morality. Nuns and priests are dedicated to morality. It matter not how many there are, it is their intention in their actions. Do you disagree?
This is slander. Gay people can accuse you of immorality for calling them immoral.
You have to show why you think they are immoral, and why nuns and priests are moral.
You state you are Orthodox. If you have not noticed this is CAF. Homosexuals, Homosexual acts are immoral based on Church teaching. This is sufficient on this forum to state this.
We are not Christians of the Bible alone, or have you forgotten that Orthodox are people of the Bible/Tradition and Catholics are as well. We believe in Church teaching. What do you believe in?.
Just because I am an Indian does not mean that I have to approve of everything that happens in India, of what she says or does. If it were not so, no organisation will change with the times, and we would have been using horse cart and stones instead of airplanes and computers today. Even Jesus questioned anointed priests in his temple when He was just 12 years old. Are we not exhorted to follow Jesus?
What does being an Indian have to do with Christ, the Bible/Tradition and Church teaching?
Why do you argue for Homosexuality. Do you struggle with homosexuality?
My argument is valid irrespective of whether I am a homosexual, or Orthodox or an African.
Africans and Orthodox do not promote as their state of existence to be sexual or asexual. Homosexuals argue for their existence as normal, a variant, created that way. Do you find this to be true. Did God create Homosexuals as Homosexuals?
Is it true that you believe Morality is not fixed, is fluid and can change?
It depends on what you surmise as “moral”. Jesus has changed rules about marriage and adultery etc, during His human existence on earth. These are rules on morality, unlike road rules and legal rules and customs and manners, and dress codes which are different from place to place. I think you are confused about what are legal and what are moral.
What did Jesus do to change the morality of marriage and adultery?

Abortion
Murder
Rape
Incest
Homosexuality
Masturbation
Pornography

are these always immoral or just sometimes immoral?
 
I found these articles by David Crawford fascinating.


  1. *]payingattentiontothesky.com/2013/05/08/why-we-are-losing-the-gay-marriage-debate-david-s-crawford/

    *]payingattentiontothesky.com/2013/05/09/the-public-reason-of-orientation-david-s-crawford/

    *]payingattentiontothesky.com/2013/05/10/the-anthropology-of-orientation-david-s-crawford/

    For all your philosophizing, your arguments do not show up in a court of law nor is the issue of gay marriage decided by them. It was quite eye-opening for me and left me somewhat depressed.

    dj
 
So we have Jesus and Paul and Deutronomy saying and doing things at different times which are at odds. What matters is whether they are done out of love or hate.
Everything is O.K if it is done out of LOVE, because with the Redeeming Sacrificial Death of Jesus on the cross, all LAWS were abolished.
Jesus specifically said he did not come to abolish the Law but fulfill it. If you are going to say you “stick to the Bible’s view” at least do so.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top