| Welcome to Campfire Soapbox. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Gay Priest Speaks Out; an interview | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Oct 11 2005, 04:51 PM (1,276 Views) | |
| cmoehle | Oct 14 2005, 02:59 AM Post #31 |
|
Chris - San Antonio TX
|
Jane, you're exactly right, there is a line that some Christians cross and become unChristian, and in the case above unAmerican. But you offer no argument for the basis of your opinion the passages are plain, and no counter to arguments it is not, arguments that have existed over 2000 years. All you do is proclaim it so. And, Cal, that is all you do, proclaim it. No argument, no explanation, just a pontificating proclamation. "...for a man to lie with another man it is an abomination, what's so hard about that?" The translation is incorrect as I have shown. "The Christian point of view has to consider that the Bible is the final authority for believers and behavior. " 2000 years of Christian debate has not settled what is right and wrong in this case. "For anyone to say there is no condemnation of homosexual activity in the Bible is to show that persons ignorance of the scriptures. There are some who attempt to open the door to immorality by referring to “the modern concept of Christian ethics.” But are those people really practicing Christians?" For anyone to say there is condemnation of homosexual activity in the Bible is to show that person's ignorance of the scriptures. There are some who attempt to open the door to immorality by referring to “their personal concept of Christian ethics.” But are those people really practicing Christians? See how easy it is to just say it. I feel great, I don't have to support my words, don't have to justify them, all I have to do is say it's so. Well, here's my proclamation, God does not say homosexuality is a sin. For those of you who just don't quite understand, you don't have to convince us, you have to convince God of your beliefs. "Calling oneself a Christian does not make it so. There is considerable difference between saying you are a Christian and practicing Christianity." Agreed, 100%. A good example are the fearful and hateful bigots of Westboro Baptist Church, wouldn't you say? I notice no one touched this Bible says then in the second passage that homosexuals should be put to death. Why is that? When are you going to start the killing? |
|
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order. --Barry Goldwater | |
![]() |
|
| cmoehle | Oct 14 2005, 03:21 AM Post #32 |
|
Chris - San Antonio TX
|
Along the same lines as "Bible says then in the second passage that homosexuals should be put to death." and when will the killing begin, I offer, in order to help you ponder your personal selectivity of which bibilical passages you choose to follow and which you choose not to, the following from The Six Bible Passages Used To Condemn Homosexuals:
There's more there if you care to read it. Question is, do you follow all the Leviticus statutes? When will the killing begin? |
|
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order. --Barry Goldwater | |
![]() |
|
| passinthru | Oct 14 2005, 06:13 AM Post #33 |
![]()
John - Gainesville, FL
|
If Christ Himself had said anything against homosexuality, it didn't make it into the Bible. |
| Faster horses, younger women, older whiskey, more money... | |
![]() |
|
| Fr. Mike | Oct 14 2005, 09:33 AM Post #34 |
|
Member
|
Chris, I'm trying to grasp what your argument is here regarding homosexuality. It appears that you are trying to find fault with Christians who interpret biblical passage as meaning that homosexuality is wrong? I took liberty to paste a portion of the Catholic catechism-- as it might lend some help to this conversation--from a "reasoned" angle-- as it appears you like to approach all religion. And--I realize that you are not Catholic--so this document my be considered by you as just another source of information when approaching this subject. There is an important message in 112.1 which I have copied just below: It refers to the "unity of "GOD'S" plan". ____________________________________________________________________ 112 1. Be especially attentive "to the content and unity of the whole Scripture". Different as the books which compose it may be, Scripture is a unity by reason of the unity of God's plan ____________________________________________________________________ If one is to look at the sacred scripture as being the inspired word of "GOD"--to his people-- as brought forth from the writings of man-- but through the holy spirit's inspiration--then it is reasonable to assume that this inspired text would conform to "GOD'S" --plan. Would it be reasonable to assume that a plan that requires the planet to populate and uses males and females to procreate would consider "homosexual sex" within that plan? When we stand in a mirror and view the body we were given and then consider the body of the opposite sex and what the various functions of the parts,can we see a part of "GOD'S" plan displayed before us? Is their any doubt in our minds what the function of the various parts is for? When we consider the chastity requirements within biblical context--would any homosexual sex act be considered a sin against "GOD". Of course it would. This would be a violation of "GOD'S" plan. When we consider the marriage act within biblical context, could there ever be a situation where marriage between the sexes could reasonable? Not if you consider that marriage is intended primarily as a vehicle for procreation and family structure in keeping with "GOD'S" plan. Now considering the nature of "GOD" as being one of love. And this love is for all his creation, then of course we must love as he does everyone. Homosexual practices are not normal and are a sin against "GOD'S" plan, but the person is loved despite their sin's. With regard to my topic here, I must view all my brothers and sisters as beings made in my Fathers image. I'm personally not going to judge any of their sins. This is a matter between them and "GOD". A priest that happens to be homosexual is not horrible. He has a disordered condition and when acted upon can result in sin. But in the same light, a heterosexual priest commits an equal sin when he acts upon his condition outside of marriage. Chastity is a requirement of all mankind wether homosexual or heterosexual. Within "GOD'S" plan of procreation, would it ever be considered normal for a man to marry a man or a woman to marry a woman? It would not make sense. Now this is from a Catholic perspective and not intended to have any more bearing on your resoning than what you care to give it --as you compare various sources in your search for your truth. Jane and I happen to be Catholic and I will not speak for her--but will include the fact that when we discuss the bible and its passages, we apply tradition to all interpretation. I must add that fact as a footnote. ____________________________________________________________________ III. THE HOLY SPIRIT, INTERPRETER OF SCRIPTURE 109 In Sacred Scripture, God speaks to man in a human way. To interpret Scripture correctly, the reader must be attentive to what the human authors truly wanted to affirm, and to what God wanted to reveal to us by their words.75 110 In order to discover the sacred authors' intention, the reader must take into account the conditions of their time and culture, the literary genres in use at that time, and the modes of feeling, speaking and narrating then current. "For the fact is that truth is differently presented and expressed in the various types of historical writing, in prophetical and poetical texts, and in other forms of literary expression."76 111 But since Sacred Scripture is inspired, there is another and no less important principle of correct interpretation, without which Scripture would remain a dead letter. "Sacred Scripture must be read and interpreted in the light of the same Spirit by whom it was written."77 The Second Vatican Council indicates three criteria for interpreting Scripture in accordance with the Spirit who inspired it.78 112 1. Be especially attentive "to the content and unity of the whole Scripture". Different as the books which compose it may be, Scripture is a unity by reason of the unity of God's plan, of which Christ Jesus is the center and heart, open since his Passover.79 The phrase "heart of Christ" can refer to Sacred Scripture, which makes known his heart, closed before the Passion, as the Scripture was obscure. But the Scripture has been opened since the Passion; since those who from then on have understood it, consider and discern in what way the prophecies must be interpreted.80 113 2. Read the Scripture within "the living Tradition of the whole Church". According to a saying of the Fathers, Sacred Scripture is written principally in the Church's heart rather than in documents and records, for the Church carries in her Tradition the living memorial of God's Word, and it is the Holy Spirit who gives her the spiritual interpretation of the Scripture (". . . according to the spiritual meaning which the Spirit grants to the Church"81). 114 3. Be attentive to the analogy of faith.82 By "analogy of faith" we mean the coherence of the truths of faith among themselves and within the whole plan of Revelation. The senses of Scripture 115 According to an ancient tradition, one can distinguish between two senses of Scripture: the literal and the spiritual, the latter being subdivided into the allegorical, moral and anagogical senses. The profound concordance of the four senses guarantees all its richness to the living reading of Scripture in the Church. 116 The literal sense is the meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis, following the rules of sound interpretation: "All other senses of Sacred Scripture are based on the literal."83 117 The spiritual sense. Thanks to the unity of God's plan, not only the text of Scripture but also the realities and events about which it speaks can be signs. 1. The allegorical sense. We can acquire a more profound understanding of events by recognizing their significance in Christ; thus the crossing of the Red Sea is a sign or type of Christ's victory and also of Christian Baptism.84 2. The moral sense. The events reported in Scripture ought to lead us to act justly. As St. Paul says, they were written "for our instruction".85 3. The anagogical sense (Greek: anagoge, "leading"). We can view realities and events in terms of their eternal significance, leading us toward our true homeland: thus the Church on earth is a sign of the heavenly Jerusalem.86 118 A medieval couplet summarizes the significance of the four senses: The Letter speaks of deeds; Allegory to faith; The Moral how to act; Anagogy our destiny.87 119 "It is the task of exegetes to work, according to these rules, towards a better understanding and explanation of the meaning of Sacred Scripture in order that their research may help the Church to form a firmer judgement. For, of course, all that has been said about the manner of interpreting Scripture is ultimately subject to the judgement of the Church which exercises the divinely conferred commission and ministry of watching over and interpreting the Word of God."88 But I would not believe in the Gospel, had not the authority of the Catholic Church already moved me.89 |
|
A humble servant of the Lord Jesus Christ Don't forget to say your prayers! The unborn have rights too. | |
![]() |
|
| CalRed | Oct 14 2005, 10:05 AM Post #35 |
|
Member
|
Chris You are coming to a gunfight with an unloaded gun. You can't discuss the Bible with someone who is not well versed in it and obviously you are not. Your translation is totally inaccurate and shows the lack of Biblical knowledge. I am home in an emergency because of a death in the family. If I had more time here(and a normal hook-up, not a dial-up) I could answer all your questions. However you would still not believe them so I wonder if there is any use. However for the Christians on this forum, I will give a brief explanation. The basic principle of Bible interpretation is this: First, if the literal sense makes common sense, seek no other sense. Second, all things are intended to be taken literally unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. The Bible says that God has blueprinted the ages. This is stated in Hebrews 1:2. This unique declaration reveals that Jesus actually planned and designed the various stages into which man's history would flow before time and space were set into operation. You are questioning statements that pertain to completely different "ages." You should read Dr. Ryrie's book on "dispensation" if you are really interested in learning about the Bible. Even the avowed enemies of dispensational interpretation have to make distinctions between the way God deals with mankind in the dispensation of the law, the Church and the coming Messianic kingdom. When Lucifer, the archangel, through pride and desire to be equal with God rebelled against God and led a revolt among the angels, God had to make a plan whereby the angels could see that they could repent and return. All but Lucifer. Since the fallen angels made no attempt to return God had to make another plan. That was the reason he created man, a little below the angels and gave man the desire to sin and the ability to repent from sin and regain God's favor. Perhaps you should read Isaiah and Ezekiel for the story of Lucifer and his fall from grace. You have stated Lucifer isn't mentioned in the Old Testament but perhaps you are not researching the original, just a more "modern" version. If I was home for the winter I would love to debate this with you but I won't be home for good until next month. And it isn't always easy to have a gunfight with someone who has an unloaded gun. Later C |
|
Something instead of Nothing? "I find it quite improbable that such order came out of chaos. There has to be some organizing principle. God to me is a mystery but is the explanation for the miracle of existence, why there is something instead of nothing." Alan Sandage | |
![]() |
|
| cmoehle | Oct 14 2005, 11:50 AM Post #36 |
|
Chris - San Antonio TX
|
Cal, seems to me you're coming to this fight without even a gun. Answer one simple question, if you can. "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. " If you consider that plainly, and find it a command against homosexuality, then just as it plainly it commands you to put them to death. My question, when does your killing begin? Leviticus 26:14-16 that "If you do not obey me and do not carry out all of these commandments, if instead, you reject my statutes, and if your soul abhors my ordinances so as not to carry out all my commandments ...I, in turn, will do this to you: I will appoint over you a sudden terror, consumption and fever that shall waste away the eyes and cause the soul to pine away; also, you shall sow your seed uselessly, for your enemies shall eat it up." Jelly, you haven't answered that one yet either. Jane? |
|
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order. --Barry Goldwater | |
![]() |
|
| cmoehle | Oct 14 2005, 12:05 PM Post #37 |
|
Chris - San Antonio TX
|
Mike, thanks for the tons of reading material. I'll try to come back to it when I have time tonight. "It appears that you are trying to find fault with Christians who interpret biblical passage as meaning that homosexuality is wrong?" No, as I pointed out earlier this is a debate that has lasted over 2000 years. I am taking one side of the debate, arguing that the Bible does not make statements regarding homosexuality. So far from others I have seen nothing but authoritative instructions on how to read the Bible this way or that, pontifical proclamations it does condemn homosexuality, and a supporting argument that the English version seems such plain language. And no ones seems to want to answer a single, simple question. Assuming Leviticus condemns homosexuality implies it also commands that you put homosexuals to death--when does the killing begin? I think it would be rather arrogant on my part if I were to claim I have the one absolute answer and declare the 2000 year old debate finished. In a way, I guess, if I think about it, I do not see truth in answers, only questions. Is it not true that this issue has been debated throughout Christianity and still sharply divides Christians? |
|
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order. --Barry Goldwater | |
![]() |
|
| CalRed | Oct 14 2005, 02:59 PM Post #38 |
|
Member
|
Chris, I'm surprised you don't know the answer to your question. I can assure you most Christians know the answer. Rather I should say "practicing Christians" who continually study God's Word. That verse in Leviticus was God's attitude towards that evil practice and considered it worthy of punishment by death. Since God has never changed I suggest it is still his attitude today. He was giving the law to Israel and deeply loved the children of Israel. He did not want them to sin and because he loved them so much he gave them very strict laws to prevent them from sinning. In those times, when anyone broke the law they paid the penalty. God is a holy God who hates and judges sin. Today the church tolerates sin and in many instances, condones it. God does not. When Christ died on the cross, remember He said He was here to fulfill the law, we came out from under the law and now live under grace. People can and do repent from sin and are able to be born again today, thereby delivering them from guilt and penalty of their sins. Even a homosexual can repent and be forgiven. However, the penalty of sin is death and Christians must be careful and ask for forgiveness as everyone else that wants to enter Christ's kingdom. We are all sinners. There is an abundance of sinners. Remember Isaiah 55:8-9 "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts your thoughts." In case there is someone reading these posts who is looking for the truth and not simply being amused, I offer the following: Are you honestly looking for answers? Will you accept evidence as it would be accepted before a court of law? Are you an inquirer or spiritual subversive? "Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshiped and served the creature more than the creator"(Romans 1:25)"And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient"(Romans 1:28) Jesus Christ threw out these words: "He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God." (John 8:47) |
|
Something instead of Nothing? "I find it quite improbable that such order came out of chaos. There has to be some organizing principle. God to me is a mystery but is the explanation for the miracle of existence, why there is something instead of nothing." Alan Sandage | |
![]() |
|
| CalRed | Oct 14 2005, 03:04 PM Post #39 |
|
Member
|
Chris You should have given your source. It is from "THE BIBLE THROUGH GAY EYES." I notice you quoted a lot from there but probably forgot to mention where it came from... |
|
Something instead of Nothing? "I find it quite improbable that such order came out of chaos. There has to be some organizing principle. God to me is a mystery but is the explanation for the miracle of existence, why there is something instead of nothing." Alan Sandage | |
![]() |
|
| Colo_Crawdad | Oct 14 2005, 03:32 PM Post #40 |
![]()
Lowell
|
CalRed, Haven't you been giving us opinions from what could be considered as "THE BIBLE THROUGH STRAIGHT EYES?" I think that is Chris' point. All humans view the Bible through their own eyes and tend to label those who view it through other eyes as "non practicing Christians" or some other dysphemism. |
| "WE HAVE MET THE ENEMY AND HE IS US." --- Pogo | |
![]() |
|
| cmoehle | Oct 14 2005, 03:54 PM Post #41 |
|
Chris - San Antonio TX
|
Cal "That verse in Leviticus was God's attitude towards that evil practice and considered it worthy of punishment by death. Since God has never changed I suggest it is still his attitude today." Cal, first off such an answer begs the question. Why do you choose to follow God's attitude in condeming homosexuals but choose not to follow God's attitude about putting them to death? Second, I thought that "The basic principle of Bible interpretation is this: First, if the literal sense makes common sense, seek no other sense. " How does commandment to put homosexuals to death become mere attitude? Where does that come from? It's not there literally, and makes uncommon sense--God attituded put them to death? Ah, but I see the answer flip flops back to "He was giving the law". If the law was put them to death, why do you choose not to follow that commandment? Third--what a sudden leap, Leviticus to Christ on the cross! If "we came out from under the law and now live under grace" and that means grace from killing homosexuals then why choose not to extend that grace to homosexuals? The leap confuses me. Where in the Levitcus passages is there mention of Christ and grace? This is allowed but the passage-contemporary context of pagan ritual is not? And what happened to plain reading and common sense? Fourth, we flip flop from grace back to "However, the penalty of sin is death"? My head is spinning--which is it? "Are you honestly looking for answers? .... Have you taken to talking to yourself, Cal? You want to discuss this, Cal, cut the personal crap. |
|
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order. --Barry Goldwater | |
![]() |
|
| cmoehle | Oct 14 2005, 03:57 PM Post #42 |
|
Chris - San Antonio TX
|
Lowell, something like that. I would say Cal is opining on "THE BIBLE THROUGH CAL's EYES?" as you yours, others theirs and me mine. |
|
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order. --Barry Goldwater | |
![]() |
|
| cmoehle | Oct 14 2005, 04:00 PM Post #43 |
|
Chris - San Antonio TX
|
I have given explicit links to all I quote, Cal. Ad hominem is a phoney argument masking lack of good argument. |
|
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order. --Barry Goldwater | |
![]() |
|
| cmoehle | Oct 14 2005, 04:05 PM Post #44 |
|
Chris - San Antonio TX
|
Mike, I started reading your post of Oct 14 2005, 10:33 AM more thoroughly. Could you go back and use quotes or bold or whatever to distinguish your comments from the Catholic catechism. It does sound interesting, and I have comments, but it would help to know who I'm replying to. |
|
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order. --Barry Goldwater | |
![]() |
|
| TexasShadow | Oct 14 2005, 06:22 PM Post #45 |
![]()
Jane
|
Chris... re homosexuality forbidden and penalty of death......... sorry, i thought i responded to this, but guess i was just thinking about it. You're arguing that if we take one, we have to take the other with it. but there are two distinct statements these verses. 1. homosexuality is an abomination and forbidden 2. punishment is death But just as christianity has evolved, so did judaism...to less cruel penalties. The old eye for an eye, life for a life law was altered to putting a value on eyes, hands, and lives and requiring $$ or assets instead of eyes and lives. Before Jesus came. I don't know what rationale the jews used to soften the penalty for homosexuality, but I'll find out. And also, what they do about it, now. I suspect it comes from one core truth in judaism...that human life is sacred. For a jew, saving a life takes precedence over all the other laws. Same with christianity, but again, many christians tend to overlook that core truth. Myself, I suspect that the ruling against homosexual acts came from an inner sense that homosexual acts are inherently un-natural, even though we can see some animals attempting to do it. Because, as Fr Mike says, we know how babies are conceived and it requires male and female components. The ancients may not have known the details, but they could see that it took a male and a female together to get babies. And...we are not just animals.. we're something higher than animals. |
|
| |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Soapbox · Next Topic » |










10:35 AM Jul 13