Gay marriage could signal return to ‘centuries of persecution’, say RCC priests

Kerdy

Taxiarches
Joined
Jan 23, 2011
Messages
5,813
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Michał Kalina said:
Kerdy said:
Michał Kalina said:
Kerdy said:
Nephi said:
Charles Martel said:
Homosexual:ho·mo·sex·u·al/ˌhoʊ məˈsɛk ʃu əl or, esp. British, -ˈsɛks yu-/ Show Spelled [hoh-muh-sek-shoo-uh l or, esp. British, -seks-yoo-] Show IPA
adjective  
1. of, pertaining to, or exhibiting homosexuality.
2. of, pertaining to, or noting the same sex.
This is the problem definition. I think he's making the distinction between "homosexual (the person)" and "homosexual behavior/activities," which are very different meanings meant by "homosexual" in this context. So if one says "anti-homosexual" it could mean "anti-homosexual (the person)" or "anti-homosexual behavior/activities."
He most likely is; however, consistent with his traditional debating style, he confused what is being discussed with what he wants to discuss.  This then creates an environment of confusion in which only he knows what he is talking about and everyone else is “wrong”.    

I suggest, rather than do this, he uses an open mind and attempt to understand what people are saying.  This thread isn’t about homosexuals who control their desire to sin.  It’s about all of the others, the 99.9% of them and social acceptance resulting in the attacks we see increasing on churches.  In other words, he is avoiding the real topic and making his own arguments which have been made in other threads and are completely irrelevant to this thread.  Michal needs to stop for a moment and actually attempt to understand the argument before posting.  We are all guilty of not doing this from time to time, but there are some of us who do it regularly.

Hint:  Michal, this isn’t about individual, specific people who have deviant sexual desires (as most people alive do) and control themselves, it’s about the rest of it all.  Do you need a definition of “the rest” or do you get me?
Who has attacked "your Church"? How? Can you post some links to newsstories?
Do you ever watch television?
Never heard of any Orthodox Church being "attacked" by gays.
Then you aren't "paying attention."

I truly enjoy your selective understanding and word usage.  It makes for such invigorating dialogue. 
 

Charles Martel

Taxiarches
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
6,805
Reaction score
0
Points
0
JamesRottnek said:
Kerdy said:
JamesRottnek said:
Charles Martel said:
Michał Kalina said:
Charles Martel said:
Nephi said:
Charles Martel said:
Homosexual:ho·mo·sex·u·al/ˌhoʊ məˈsɛk ʃu əl or, esp. British, -ˈsɛks yu-/ Show Spelled [hoh-muh-sek-shoo-uh l or, esp. British, -seks-yoo-] Show IPA
adjective 
1. of, pertaining to, or exhibiting homosexuality.
2. of, pertaining to, or noting the same sex.
This is the problem definition. I think he's making the distinction between "homosexual (the person)" and "homosexual behavior/activities," which are very different meanings meant by "homosexual" in this context. So if one says "anti-homosexual" it could mean "anti-homosexual (the person)" or "anti-homosexual behavior/activities."
Let me ask you this.......would he make the same distinction between pedophile and pedophilia?
One is activity and one is a person.
Can you separate one from the other?

If I murder someone am I not a murderer?

If I fornicate with someone am I not a fornicator?

If I blaspheme the name of God am I not a blasphemer?

You can not do one thing and say you have nothing to do with it.
So you hate all men, yes?
Could you elaborate?  I am not clear how you came to this conclusion.
Romans 12:9, "Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good."  Is sin evil?  If it is, then Martel says we are to hate all men.
Yes, sin is evil and those in the act of sinning are evil. what do you want to hear? Do you take sin that lightly? Do you believe the Lord does? You are a fool if you take God for granted and depend soley on his mercy and love. We will all one day be held accountable for every sin, every thought, every slight in the eyes of God. True, God is a loving and merciful God but he is also a Righteous and Just one as well and we are all under his judgment at the appointed time. Don't think for a second that you can trivialize a sin because  God said we must be "sincere" in our love, acutally if that's the case, then we should speak out even more to the homosexual for the error in his ways and the corruption he sows to others, especially children who are easily decieved with this culture and it's stamp of approval on sodomy and fornication and a host of other sins.

But yes, we are to despise the homosexual if he is not repentant and actively engages in his debased "lifestyle". Seems many on here as well as everywhere else want some special rules for homosexuals, like in the secular world, we have to treat them and their sin like it's something special with special considerations and watch how we address them or we are to be taken as "haters" and "bigots" well you can count me out. I will call them out and name their sin, they are no better than anyone else regardless of how much browbeating and shaming we get from the immoral secularists and the powers that be from the well financed "gay" mafia that threaten and intimidate anyone in their way in getting what they want and what they want is simple; acceptance and legitimacy. We seem to be just about there, here in the "real world" where they call evil "good" and good "evil" or what they now label the "new normal".

So that's where we're at now, that even in the church we can't even call men bedding down with other men something that's "evil" and a sin which God said he hates without being called "haters" ourselves. The New Church of Sodom, open acceptance for one and all, no matter what deviancy you cling to becaue after all, God will still "wuv" you very much. Good luck with that.
 

Charles Martel

Taxiarches
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
6,805
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Michał Kalina said:
Kerdy said:
Nephi said:
Charles Martel said:
Homosexual:ho·mo·sex·u·al/ˌhoʊ məˈsɛk ʃu əl or, esp. British, -ˈsɛks yu-/ Show Spelled [hoh-muh-sek-shoo-uh l or, esp. British, -seks-yoo-] Show IPA
adjective 
1. of, pertaining to, or exhibiting homosexuality.
2. of, pertaining to, or noting the same sex.
This is the problem definition. I think he's making the distinction between "homosexual (the person)" and "homosexual behavior/activities," which are very different meanings meant by "homosexual" in this context. So if one says "anti-homosexual" it could mean "anti-homosexual (the person)" or "anti-homosexual behavior/activities."
He most likely is; however, consistent with his traditional debating style, he confused what is being discussed with what he wants to discuss.  This then creates an environment of confusion in which only he knows what he is talking about and everyone else is “wrong”.   

I suggest, rather than do this, he uses an open mind and attempt to understand what people are saying.  This thread isn’t about homosexuals who control their desire to sin.  It’s about all of the others, the 99.9% of them and social acceptance resulting in the attacks we see increasing on churches.  In other words, he is avoiding the real topic and making his own arguments which have been made in other threads and are completely irrelevant to this thread.  Michal needs to stop for a moment and actually attempt to understand the argument before posting.  We are all guilty of not doing this from time to time, but there are some of us who do it regularly.

Hint:  Michal, this isn’t about individual, specific people who have deviant sexual desires (as most people alive do) and control themselves, it’s about the rest of it all.  Do you need a definition of “the rest” or do you get me?
Who has attacked "your Church"? How? Can you post some links to newsstories?
'Gay' hate vandalizes church, threatens even more violence

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2011/10/356361/#U2Z7ITAsSfJVD90P.99


In the early morning hours, on the eve of a banquet designed to expose the homosexual activist agenda, security cameras on the campus of the Christian Liberty Academy, a school run by the Church of Christian Liberty in Arlington Heights, Ill., captured what may be a prominent example of an anti-Christian “hate crime.”


Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2011/10/356361/#U2Z7ITAsSfJVD90P.99

Threat to burn down local Catholic church & profane attacks after pro-traditional marriage sign is posted on church property.
But the Catholics aren't backing down!

Flood of hate and profanity targeting churchHomosexual activists also came and put hateful signs on the Church property. One sign said "Holy Mother Virgin Whore" and another said "Jesus freaks pray for death." Two activists stood outside the church for about an hour.

http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen2/12b/acushnet_church/index.html

 

stavros_388

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Sep 5, 2010
Messages
1,325
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Canada
Charles Martel said:
JamesRottnek said:
Kerdy said:
JamesRottnek said:
Charles Martel said:
Michał Kalina said:
Charles Martel said:
Nephi said:
Charles Martel said:
Homosexual:ho·mo·sex·u·al/ˌhoʊ məˈsɛk ʃu əl or, esp. British, -ˈsɛks yu-/ Show Spelled [hoh-muh-sek-shoo-uh l or, esp. British, -seks-yoo-] Show IPA
adjective 
1. of, pertaining to, or exhibiting homosexuality.
2. of, pertaining to, or noting the same sex.
This is the problem definition. I think he's making the distinction between "homosexual (the person)" and "homosexual behavior/activities," which are very different meanings meant by "homosexual" in this context. So if one says "anti-homosexual" it could mean "anti-homosexual (the person)" or "anti-homosexual behavior/activities."
Let me ask you this.......would he make the same distinction between pedophile and pedophilia?
One is activity and one is a person.
Can you separate one from the other?

If I murder someone am I not a murderer?

If I fornicate with someone am I not a fornicator?

If I blaspheme the name of God am I not a blasphemer?

You can not do one thing and say you have nothing to do with it.
So you hate all men, yes?
Could you elaborate?  I am not clear how you came to this conclusion.
Romans 12:9, "Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good."  Is sin evil?  If it is, then Martel says we are to hate all men.
Yes, sin is evil and those in the act of sinning are evil. what do you want to hear? Do you take sin that lightly? Do you believe the Lord does? You are a fool if you take God for granted and depend soley on his mercy and love. We will all one day be held accountable for every sin, every thought, every slight in the eyes of God. True, God is a loving and merciful God but he is also a Righteous and Just one as well and we are all under his judgment at the appointed time. Don't think for a second that you can trivialize a sin because   God said we must be "sincere" in our love, acutally if that's the case, then we should speak out even more to the homosexual for the error in his ways and the corruption he sows to others, especially children who are easily decieved with this culture and it's stamp of approval on sodomy and fornication and a host of other sins.

But yes, we are to despise the homosexual if he is not repentant and actively engages in his debased "lifestyle". Seems many on here as well as everywhere else want some special rules for homosexuals, like in the secular world, we have to treat them and their sin like it's something special with special considerations and watch how we address them or we are to be taken as "haters" and "bigots" well you can count me out. I will call them out and name their sin, they are no better than anyone else regardless of how much browbeating and shaming we get from the immoral secularists and the powers that be from the well financed "gay" mafia that threaten and intimidate anyone in their way in getting what they want and what they want is simple; acceptance and legitimacy. We seem to be just about there, here in the "real world" where they call evil "good" and good "evil" or what they now label the "new normal".

So that's where we're at now, that even in the church we can't even call men bedding down with other men something that's "evil" and a sin which God said he hates without being called "haters" ourselves. The New Church of Sodom, open acceptance for one and all, no matter what deviancy you cling to becaue after all, God will still "wuv" you very much. Good luck with that.
Your attitude sucks. And is un-Christian. We are not to "despise the homosexual", or any human being for that matter. I suggest that you go back to the basics and re-read the Gospels.
 

choy

Archon
Joined
Jul 11, 2012
Messages
2,316
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Kerdy said:
choy said:
Kerdy said:
If I find a woman other than my wife sexually appealing, does this automatically make me an adulterer?  What if I find several women this way, am I an adulterer?  No, not until I entertain these thoughts resulting in an overt action on my part.
Actually, yes.

Matthew 5:27-28
27 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
Notice I expounded by saying "entertain these thoughts" rather than simply leaving it to them existing.  There is a difference between sinful thoughts popping up and us focusing on those thoughts.  If a person centers on those thoughts, I would agree with you completely.

KJV says it better, I think:
27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:

28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Taking notice and lusting after are different.
The fact that the sinful thought pop-up means that there is still lust in your heart that needs to be stomped out by prayer and asceticism.  Lustful reaction is not natural, therefore it is not okay to have them even if you didn't will the initial thought that popped into your mind.  You mean not have a tree of lust in your heart, but you certainly have the seeds of lust in there.  Many writings by saints say this.  I forgot which monk was it who was with brother monks and there was this parade of a pagan queen where she paraded around naked.  They were in the crowd and the other monks turned around so as they will not see the woman and be tempted into lustful thoughts.  While the one monk (who is a saint, I wish I have better memory) just stood there and watched.  Because he was pure in heart, he didn't even had that involuntary thought, entertained or not.  That was the point of the story.
 

choy

Archon
Joined
Jul 11, 2012
Messages
2,316
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Charles Martel said:
Yes, sin is evil and those in the act of sinning are evil.
This is why I believe the so-called traditionalist movement in the Roman Catholic Church is bogus.  It is spearheaded by people who mask their hate and bigotry with grandeur of Roman Catholic ritual tradition.  All they clamor is traditional externals, the traditional Mass, Latin, vestments, incense, etc.  But I have never heard of them talk about traditional Christian values of love.  Its all about judging someone for their sins or even for the type of Mass they attend.

By their fruits you will know them.  That is why I became Orthodox.
 

Hiwot

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Jun 26, 2011
Messages
1,934
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
44
Location
USA
Charles Martel said:
JamesRottnek said:
Charles Martel said:
Michał Kalina said:
Charles Martel said:
Nephi said:
Charles Martel said:
Homosexual:ho·mo·sex·u·al/ˌhoʊ məˈsɛk ʃu əl or, esp. British, -ˈsɛks yu-/ Show Spelled [hoh-muh-sek-shoo-uh l or, esp. British, -seks-yoo-] Show IPA
adjective 
1. of, pertaining to, or exhibiting homosexuality.
2. of, pertaining to, or noting the same sex.
This is the problem definition. I think he's making the distinction between "homosexual (the person)" and "homosexual behavior/activities," which are very different meanings meant by "homosexual" in this context. So if one says "anti-homosexual" it could mean "anti-homosexual (the person)" or "anti-homosexual behavior/activities."
Let me ask you this.......would he make the same distinction between pedophile and pedophilia?
One is activity and one is a person.
Can you separate one from the other?

If I murder someone am I not a murderer?

If I fornicate with someone am I not a fornicator?

If I blaspheme the name of God am I not a blasphemer?

You can not do one thing and say you have nothing to do with it.
So you hate all men, yes?
I see you hate me James.

Is there anyway you can stick to a topic without calling someone a "hater"?

Are we projecting again?
Mr Charles , that was a legitimate question, if you say all sinners are evil and we are to hate evil, then pray tell, WHO are we told to love? and most importantly WHO are WE? are you not a sinner like me? then we should hate one another, declare war against sinners, oh ye holly folks who declare yourselves followers of The Christ! by your definition Perhaps Christ was wrong in eating and drinking with sinners in being friend of harlots and tax collectors,perhaps he should have become like one of those androgynous palace peacocks ,who have decked themselves with the symbol of Christ's infinite Love for Mankind and yet have drunk themselves into intoxication with the theocratic dynasty they have built forthemselves in the name of the Creator. perhaps He should have accepted Pilot's proposal when He was facing his Cross, perhaps His Church today should espouse herself to the power of the State so she may not face her Cross.

your insist that the Church is in danger from the civil liberties of homosexuals. pray tell me, what kind of danger is being talked about? is it the church abandoning her Faith and condoning sin of anykind? if you believe that then you believe heresy. the gates of hell shall not prevail upon the Church of Christ. now so what is your fear you want everyone infected with? that Christ's Love is not enough to bring men to repentance? that Christ's arms are not stretched on the cross to bring all men into himself in the Spirit for the Glory of the Father? that if Christians can not live in a christian state, Christianity becomes crippled? this is a new Gospel to me. the church will have enemies , men and women of varying degree of brokenness will lash out against God against the Church of Christ, this will not change, however if the Church starts to stop being the hospital to sinners, where they get her motherly compassion, guidance in wisdom, faithful with steadfast unshakable love for all mankind, where Christ's love and mercy trumps all other human reservation, where the harlot and the virgin stand together before God who loves them alike. Where Christ the humble Physician who labours to care for the sick and the wounded, the labored and the dying. where He is touched by those covered in shame more than by those who accompany him out of their perceived importance. I assure you the Church survives because the Church has managed to Speak the Truth with LOVE at all times, this is the key that makes her different from all the heterodoxy out there, which either embraces sin as glory, or turns around and declares hate towards men and becomes a bully claiming Divine Authority.  both cups of madness the Church has seen there were those who among her chose to drink from each and they are remembered for how far they have fallen from being the Faithful Witness of Jesus Christ Crucified and Resurrected. The Messiah has rejected the offer of Pilot, His Church also will reject it and will trust in the Love of God for All Mankind : Jesus Christ Crucified and Resurrected to heal mankind of its infirmities and will Pray for those who will persecute her with compassion and love, never hate and will say with the very prayer of the Son crucified for the Love and Life of Mankind ' Forgive them Father for they know not what they do!'

I have seen you mock the trust of others in the POWER of God's Love, you forget me and you exist even now because of that Love, that Mercy. if God had judged us according to our sins, we would have been like Sodom and Gomorrah the both of us. But we are here because of that Love that sustains all and is patient with all. the level of hate we have for other human beings after we profess Christ with our lips after we have claimed to be His followers, makes our sin even worse than those of Sodom and Gomorrah. Christ was not loving the sin when He gave His VERY LIFE for US Sinners! He did not love us because we were saints, He loved us when we are sinner and loved us with the full measure of Love, and died for us sinners. I am one such sinner here to tell you that Such Love SAVES the condemned such love Regenerates the old, Vivifies the dead and with insurmountable generosity Exalts the lowly!

It is that very Love that will judge us at the end, and He goes through our heart looking for Love, saying if you have done it to one of the lowly you have done it for me. perhaps some of us are prepared to tell him how we have seen how cruel he can be, and we were afraid and we buried the talent he has given us. perhaps some of us will remind him how zealously we have campaigned for the abolishment of all sinners in his Name. how he was not there when we tolerated those lazy poor with our money and time, how even though our hearts were moved by disdain we made ourselves give that coin the homeless asked of us because it was our christian duty.what more are we supposed to do, we might say many many things, yet we will see our loquacious reason be silenced while those who Loved and showed Mercy trusting in His Mercy hear from His Pure Loving Lips,in the language of Infinite Love, the Infinite Joy of being called 'Beloved of My Father!'

Lord have Mercy!
 

Kerdy

Taxiarches
Joined
Jan 23, 2011
Messages
5,813
Reaction score
0
Points
0
choy said:
Kerdy said:
choy said:
Kerdy said:
If I find a woman other than my wife sexually appealing, does this automatically make me an adulterer?  What if I find several women this way, am I an adulterer?  No, not until I entertain these thoughts resulting in an overt action on my part.
Actually, yes.

Matthew 5:27-28
27 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
Notice I expounded by saying "entertain these thoughts" rather than simply leaving it to them existing.  There is a difference between sinful thoughts popping up and us focusing on those thoughts.  If a person centers on those thoughts, I would agree with you completely.

KJV says it better, I think:
27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:

28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Taking notice and lusting after are different.
The fact that the sinful thought pop-up means that there is still lust in your heart that needs to be stomped out by prayer and asceticism.  Lustful reaction is not natural, therefore it is not okay to have them even if you didn't will the initial thought that popped into your mind.  You mean not have a tree of lust in your heart, but you certainly have the seeds of lust in there.  Many writings by saints say this.  I forgot which monk was it who was with brother monks and there was this parade of a pagan queen where she paraded around naked.  They were in the crowd and the other monks turned around so as they will not see the woman and be tempted into lustful thoughts.  While the one monk (who is a saint, I wish I have better memory) just stood there and watched.  Because he was pure in heart, he didn't even had that involuntary thought, entertained or not.  That was the point of the story.
Such is the struggle of a Christian, the weakness of humanity and the stain of the flesh.
 

Shanghaiski

Taxiarches
Joined
Dec 26, 2009
Messages
7,982
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Age
41
Location
Wisconsin, USA
choy said:
Kerdy said:
choy said:
Kerdy said:
If I find a woman other than my wife sexually appealing, does this automatically make me an adulterer?  What if I find several women this way, am I an adulterer?  No, not until I entertain these thoughts resulting in an overt action on my part.
Actually, yes.

Matthew 5:27-28
27 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
Notice I expounded by saying "entertain these thoughts" rather than simply leaving it to them existing.  There is a difference between sinful thoughts popping up and us focusing on those thoughts.  If a person centers on those thoughts, I would agree with you completely.

KJV says it better, I think:
27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:

28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Taking notice and lusting after are different.
The fact that the sinful thought pop-up means that there is still lust in your heart that needs to be stomped out by prayer and asceticism. 
Maybe. It depends.
 

augustin717

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 15, 2006
Messages
6,850
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Kerdy said:
Shanghaiski said:
People do not become their sins.
People don't have to, but some choose to become their sin.
I haven't cracked open a theology book in many years now but still something sounds really off in this saying of yours; you tell that to the whatever chanters that sing at say a drunkards burial " I am an image of your ineffable glory  even if I bear the wounds of sin etc" ; they even sang this to that famous Greek poet Cavafy
 

Kerdy

Taxiarches
Joined
Jan 23, 2011
Messages
5,813
Reaction score
0
Points
0
augustin717 said:
Kerdy said:
Shanghaiski said:
People do not become their sins.
People don't have to, but some choose to become their sin.
I haven't cracked open a theology book in many years now but still something sounds really off in this saying of yours; you tell that to the whatever chanters that sing at say a drunkards burial " I am an image of your ineffable glory  even if I bear the wounds of sin etc" ; they even sang this to that famous Greek poet Cavafy
My apologies, but you lost me somewhere.    Are you saying a drunkard is not a drunkard?  That this drunkard did not allow himself to become his sin?
 

Romaios

Archon
Joined
Jun 13, 2008
Messages
2,940
Reaction score
0
Points
0
augustin717 said:
they even sang this to that famous Greek poet Cavafy
IIRC Cavafy made his last confession and died in good standing with God and the Church.
 

augustin717

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 15, 2006
Messages
6,850
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Romaios said:
augustin717 said:
they even sang this to that famous Greek poet Cavafy
IIRC Cavafy made his last confession and died in good standing with God and the Church.
Well as he was unable to speak with throat cancer and a sectioned trachea it would have made confession somehow difficult. The only biography I read of him says he received the last rites whatever that included.
 

Romaios

Archon
Joined
Jun 13, 2008
Messages
2,940
Reaction score
0
Points
0
augustin717 said:
Romaios said:
augustin717 said:
they even sang this to that famous Greek poet Cavafy
IIRC Cavafy made his last confession and died in good standing with God and the Church.
Well as he was unable to speak with throat cancer and a sectioned trachea it would have made confession somehow difficult. The only biography I read of him says he received the last rites whatever that included.
I remember reading something about 'last rites' too. I assumed that included confession. Under such circumstances, a nod of regret would do, I guess...

I hope he made it to heaven. It sure would be a pity if he didn't.
 

augustin717

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 15, 2006
Messages
6,850
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Fair enough although Cavafy like most people I am sure would have rather stayed her on Earth  a bit longer. Anyway my point to Kerdy was that the church when speaking through the burial rites at least does not de-humanize people to the point where x is his or her sin. With this I don't wanna imply that Kavafi was more of a sinner for having loved Alexandrinian sailors or shop boys either.
 

Romaios

Archon
Joined
Jun 13, 2008
Messages
2,940
Reaction score
0
Points
0
augustin717 said:
My point to Kerdy was that the church when speaking through the burial rites at least does not de-humanize people to the point where x is his or her sin. With this I don't wanna imply that Kavafi was more of a sinner for having loved Alexandrinian sailors or shop boys either.
I agree.
 

Kerdy

Taxiarches
Joined
Jan 23, 2011
Messages
5,813
Reaction score
0
Points
0
augustin717 said:
Fair enough although Cavafy like most people I am sure would have rather stayed her on Earth  a bit longer. Anyway my point to Kerdy was that the church when speaking through the burial rites at least does not de-humanize people to the point where x is his or her sin. With this I don't wanna imply that Kavafi was more of a sinner for having loved Alexandrinian sailors or shop boys either.
But I didn’t de-humanize anyone?  People usually are what they choose to be and if the sum of their life is following fleshly and sinful desires, they de-humanize themselves (or for that matter, prove their humanity and ignore their spirit).  Please do not put the burden of their choices on me for speaking the truth of the matter.  If you will notice, I said some people, and for some people, this is true.  Folks often become what they aspire to be, no matter how low they set the goal.

I will use the example you provided.  If a person chooses and allows himself to become a drunkard, that is what he is…a drunkard.  That does not mean it is the sum of who he is, but the fact of the matter is, he is a drunkard and has become his sin.
 

AveChriste11

High Elder
Joined
Mar 21, 2011
Messages
523
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
34
Location
Memphis, TN
If you're gay and get married, obviously you don't agree with the Orthodox Church or Roman Catholic Church.  So just get a civil secular marriage,  the Church has no rights to dictate what non-Christians can and cannot do.  It's as simple as that.
 

AveChriste11

High Elder
Joined
Mar 21, 2011
Messages
523
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
34
Location
Memphis, TN
choy said:
Kerdy said:
If I find a woman other than my wife sexually appealing, does this automatically make me an adulterer?  What if I find several women this way, am I an adulterer?  No, not until I entertain these thoughts resulting in an overt action on my part. 
Actually, yes.

Matthew 5:27-28
27 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
If Christians would stop pressuring Congress into making abortions and gay marriage illegal, then they wouldn't be considered hate organizations.  This nation was founded upon secular principles, heavily influenced by both the Church of England and the writings of men such as Thomas Paine who was a Deist.  I'm not calling anyone a "hate group", but I'm just saying -- there's a way to avoid that label.
 

Kerdy

Taxiarches
Joined
Jan 23, 2011
Messages
5,813
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Andrew Crook said:
choy said:
Kerdy said:
If I find a woman other than my wife sexually appealing, does this automatically make me an adulterer?  What if I find several women this way, am I an adulterer?  No, not until I entertain these thoughts resulting in an overt action on my part.
Actually, yes.

Matthew 5:27-28
27 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
If Christians would stop pressuring Congress into making abortions and gay marriage illegal, then they wouldn't be considered hate organizations.  This nation was founded upon secular principles, heavily influenced by both the Church of England and the writings of men such as Thomas Paine who was a Deist.  I'm not calling anyone a "hate group", but I'm just saying -- there's a way to avoid that label.
Two things I wish to correct you on from your post.

1) Rallying to make something legal or illegal is not hate work.  You didn’t just fall for the propaganda, you drowned in it.  Look at it this way, and I will use your example of abortion, someone rallied to make it legal.  Would you consider that a hate group?  If not, you shouldn’t consider people attempting to make it illegal a hate group.  The sword cuts both ways.  Not only that, but homosexual marriage has never been legal, so no one is trying to make it illegal because it already was.  People are trying to make it legal and people are trying to prevent it, very simple.  Additionally, Congress has nothing to do with marriage.  It’s always been state level and I suspect, even with the two cases SCOTUS is looking over, it will remain a state level issue, unless SCOTUS chooses to be unconstitutional.  Disagreement, even great, is not hate.  Propoganda!

2) This nation was founded on religious freedom and freedom from tyranny, period, not secular principles.  More propaganda you have fallen victim of.  Do some serious US history study.  I say serious because they don’t teach it in schools anymore.  They did, but no longer, so you will have to most likely look outside your classroom for the truth.

Additionally, what do you expect Christians to do?  Nothing?  If that is what people expect Christians to do, I suggest they show us how by doing nothing first.

Finally, there is a way to stop, avoid and end the “hate group” label.  People could always stop lying about it and using it.  I think that would work splendidly.
 

Kerdy

Taxiarches
Joined
Jan 23, 2011
Messages
5,813
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Andrew Crook said:
If you're gay and get married, obviously you don't agree with the Orthodox Church or Roman Catholic Church.  So just get a civil secular marriage,  the Church has no rights to dictate what non-Christians can and cannot do.  It's as simple as that.
Homosexuals already had a legal and binding civil union.  On paper, it’s the same thing as marriage.  Why was that not enough?  I know, they wanted to infiltrate the Church and force the Church to recognize their mockery.  So, if the Church has no right to tell non-Christians what to do (which I disagree with), why do non-Christians feel the need to tell Christians what to do?  Again, the sword cuts both ways.
 

AveChriste11

High Elder
Joined
Mar 21, 2011
Messages
523
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
34
Location
Memphis, TN
Kerdy said:
Andrew Crook said:
choy said:
Kerdy said:
If I find a woman other than my wife sexually appealing, does this automatically make me an adulterer?  What if I find several women this way, am I an adulterer?  No, not until I entertain these thoughts resulting in an overt action on my part.
Actually, yes.

Matthew 5:27-28
27 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
If Christians would stop pressuring Congress into making abortions and gay marriage illegal, then they wouldn't be considered hate organizations.  This nation was founded upon secular principles, heavily influenced by both the Church of England and the writings of men such as Thomas Paine who was a Deist.  I'm not calling anyone a "hate group", but I'm just saying -- there's a way to avoid that label.
Two things I wish to correct you on from your post.

1) Rallying to make something legal or illegal is not hate work.  You didn’t just fall for the propaganda, you drowned in it.  Look at it this way, and I will use your example of abortion, someone rallied to make it legal.  Would you consider that a hate group?  If not, you shouldn’t consider people attempting to make it illegal a hate group.  The sword cuts both ways.  Not only that, but homosexual marriage has never been legal, so no one is trying to make it illegal because it already was.  People are trying to make it legal and people are trying to prevent it, very simple.  Additionally, Congress has nothing to do with marriage.  It’s always been state level and I suspect, even with the two cases SCOTUS is looking over, it will remain a state level issue, unless SCOTUS chooses to be unconstitutional.  Disagreement, even great, is not hate.  Propoganda!

2) This nation was founded on religious freedom and freedom from tyranny, period, not secular principles.  More propaganda you have fallen victim of.  Do some serious US history study.  I say serious because they don’t teach it in schools anymore.  They did, but no longer, so you will have to most likely look outside your classroom for the truth.

Additionally, what do you expect Christians to do?  Nothing?  If that is what people expect Christians to do, I suggest they show us how by doing nothing first.

Finally, there is a way to stop, avoid and end the “hate group” label.  People could always stop lying about it and using it.  I think that would work splendidly.
1.) I never said rallying is hate work.  You are allowed to protest, that is your right.  "Homosexual marriage has never been legal" does not automatically mean it was illegal, it was simply not discussed.  For example, in many states you could commit beastiality -- even though it was frowned upon, there was nothing against it.  Now many states are trying to change that by making it a felony.   There were no laws saying that it was "okay to commit beastiality".   Just as there were no laws saying it's okay to have a homosexual marriage.  Not that I'm equating the two, it's just what I thought of -- off the top of my head.

2.) I haven't been in school for awhile, thanks for the compliment.  I have seen no evidence to suggest the Protestant claim that this nation was founded upon "Christian principles", although there were in fact many Christians who came here to escape religious persecution.   It was the Protestants who first made this claim, and now the burden of proof is on them because I have seen no evidence to convince me otherwise.   I'm well aware that Jefferson had his own ideas, and so did Paine, and Deism was a philosophy that was attractive in that time period -- although it is questionable to what extent the others agreed or disagreed with Christianity.
 

AveChriste11

High Elder
Joined
Mar 21, 2011
Messages
523
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
34
Location
Memphis, TN
Kerdy said:
Andrew Crook said:
If you're gay and get married, obviously you don't agree with the Orthodox Church or Roman Catholic Church.  So just get a civil secular marriage,  the Church has no rights to dictate what non-Christians can and cannot do.  It's as simple as that.
Homosexuals already had a legal and binding civil union.  On paper, it’s the same thing as marriage.  Why was that not enough?  I know, they wanted to infiltrate the Church and force the Church to recognize their mockery.  So, if the Church has no right to tell non-Christians what to do (which I disagree with), why do non-Christians feel the need to tell Christians what to do?  Again, the sword cuts both ways.
I agree it should be enough.  The Church shouldn't have to recognize anything, and neither should they feel that they must be "accepted" -- and instead should learn to accept themselves. 
 

Jetavan

Taxiarches
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
7,007
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
www.esoteric.msu.edu
Kerdy said:
Homosexuals already had a legal and binding civil union.  On paper, it’s the same thing as marriage. 
Are you sure about that?

In Illinois, a civil union is a legal relationship between two people — either of the same or different sex — providing all of the legal obligations, responsibilities, protections and benefits that the law of Illinois grants to married couples. But a civil union is not a marriage; a civil union does not provide federal protections or responsibilities to couples who enter into one, and a civil union will be recognized only in certain other states, not by all states.
 

Apples

Protokentarchos
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
4,360
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Andrew Crook said:
choy said:
Kerdy said:
If I find a woman other than my wife sexually appealing, does this automatically make me an adulterer?  What if I find several women this way, am I an adulterer?  No, not until I entertain these thoughts resulting in an overt action on my part. 
Actually, yes.

Matthew 5:27-28
27 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
If Christians would stop pressuring Congress into making abortions and gay marriage illegal, then they wouldn't be considered hate organizations.  This nation was founded upon secular principles, heavily influenced by both the Church of England and the writings of men such as Thomas Paine who was a Deist.  I'm not calling anyone a "hate group", but I'm just saying -- there's a way to avoid that label.
And why should Christians care what libertine apostates and heathens think of them?
 

Cyrillic

Toumarches
Joined
Jun 9, 2012
Messages
13,710
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
25
Location
Netherlands
Andrew Crook said:
If Christians would stop pressuring Congress into making abortions and gay marriage illegal, then they wouldn't be considered hate organizations.
If the world hates you, understand that it hated Me before it hated you. (John 15:18)
 

dzheremi

Protokentarchos
Joined
Jan 18, 2010
Messages
4,417
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Yeah, maybe I'm an extremist or something, but I don't particularly care if I'm considered "hateful". God knows what's in my heart (both good and bad), so the judgments of others might hurt temporarily, but they don't actually matter in the long run.
 

Ashman618

High Elder
Joined
Sep 7, 2012
Messages
510
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Psalm 2, to me at least, seems like a warning to Leaders of nations to conform the law of the land to Gods teachings.
 

Charles Martel

Taxiarches
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
6,805
Reaction score
0
Points
0
stavros_388 said:
Charles Martel said:
JamesRottnek said:
Kerdy said:
JamesRottnek said:
Charles Martel said:
Michał Kalina said:
Charles Martel said:
Nephi said:
Charles Martel said:
Homosexual:ho·mo·sex·u·al/ˌhoʊ məˈsɛk ʃu əl or, esp. British, -ˈsɛks yu-/ Show Spelled [hoh-muh-sek-shoo-uh l or, esp. British, -seks-yoo-] Show IPA
adjective 
1. of, pertaining to, or exhibiting homosexuality.
2. of, pertaining to, or noting the same sex.
This is the problem definition. I think he's making the distinction between "homosexual (the person)" and "homosexual behavior/activities," which are very different meanings meant by "homosexual" in this context. So if one says "anti-homosexual" it could mean "anti-homosexual (the person)" or "anti-homosexual behavior/activities."
Let me ask you this.......would he make the same distinction between pedophile and pedophilia?
One is activity and one is a person.
Can you separate one from the other?

If I murder someone am I not a murderer?

If I fornicate with someone am I not a fornicator?

If I blaspheme the name of God am I not a blasphemer?

You can not do one thing and say you have nothing to do with it.
So you hate all men, yes?
Could you elaborate?  I am not clear how you came to this conclusion.
Romans 12:9, "Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good."  Is sin evil?  If it is, then Martel says we are to hate all men.
Yes, sin is evil and those in the act of sinning are evil. what do you want to hear? Do you take sin that lightly? Do you believe the Lord does? You are a fool if you take God for granted and depend soley on his mercy and love. We will all one day be held accountable for every sin, every thought, every slight in the eyes of God. True, God is a loving and merciful God but he is also a Righteous and Just one as well and we are all under his judgment at the appointed time. Don't think for a second that you can trivialize a sin because   God said we must be "sincere" in our love, acutally if that's the case, then we should speak out even more to the homosexual for the error in his ways and the corruption he sows to others, especially children who are easily decieved with this culture and it's stamp of approval on sodomy and fornication and a host of other sins.

But yes, we are to despise the homosexual if he is not repentant and actively engages in his debased "lifestyle". Seems many on here as well as everywhere else want some special rules for homosexuals, like in the secular world, we have to treat them and their sin like it's something special with special considerations and watch how we address them or we are to be taken as "haters" and "bigots" well you can count me out. I will call them out and name their sin, they are no better than anyone else regardless of how much browbeating and shaming we get from the immoral secularists and the powers that be from the well financed "gay" mafia that threaten and intimidate anyone in their way in getting what they want and what they want is simple; acceptance and legitimacy. We seem to be just about there, here in the "real world" where they call evil "good" and good "evil" or what they now label the "new normal".

So that's where we're at now, that even in the church we can't even call men bedding down with other men something that's "evil" and a sin which God said he hates without being called "haters" ourselves. The New Church of Sodom, open acceptance for one and all, no matter what deviancy you cling to becaue after all, God will still "wuv" you very much. Good luck with that.
Your attitude sucks. And is un-Christian. We are not to "despise the homosexual", or any human being for that matter. I suggest that you go back to the basics and re-read the Gospels.
I said when they are "unrepentant" and choose to engage in their "lifestyle" regardless when they have been convicted in their sin. God has even pointedly states that he considers homosexuality an "abomination" in the O.T. and St. Paul fiercly condemns it in almost the whole chapter of !st Romans in the N.T. God even destroyed two cities over the Sin of Sodom, a sin which the Church declares that "cries out to heaven for vengeance"

So don't worry about me, I've read and re-read scipture and Church teaching on this and it is very clear.

I'm sorry if it offends you. take it up with God.
 

montalo

Archon
Joined
Feb 5, 2011
Messages
2,011
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Age
27
Charles Martel said:
stavros_388 said:
Charles Martel said:
JamesRottnek said:
Kerdy said:
JamesRottnek said:
Charles Martel said:
Michał Kalina said:
Charles Martel said:
Nephi said:
Charles Martel said:
Homosexual:ho·mo·sex·u·al/ˌhoʊ məˈsɛk ʃu əl or, esp. British, -ˈsɛks yu-/ Show Spelled [hoh-muh-sek-shoo-uh l or, esp. British, -seks-yoo-] Show IPA
adjective 
1. of, pertaining to, or exhibiting homosexuality.
2. of, pertaining to, or noting the same sex.
This is the problem definition. I think he's making the distinction between "homosexual (the person)" and "homosexual behavior/activities," which are very different meanings meant by "homosexual" in this context. So if one says "anti-homosexual" it could mean "anti-homosexual (the person)" or "anti-homosexual behavior/activities."
Let me ask you this.......would he make the same distinction between pedophile and pedophilia?
One is activity and one is a person.
Can you separate one from the other?

If I murder someone am I not a murderer?

If I fornicate with someone am I not a fornicator?

If I blaspheme the name of God am I not a blasphemer?

You can not do one thing and say you have nothing to do with it.
So you hate all men, yes?
Could you elaborate?  I am not clear how you came to this conclusion.
Romans 12:9, "Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good."  Is sin evil?  If it is, then Martel says we are to hate all men.
Yes, sin is evil and those in the act of sinning are evil. what do you want to hear? Do you take sin that lightly? Do you believe the Lord does? You are a fool if you take God for granted and depend soley on his mercy and love. We will all one day be held accountable for every sin, every thought, every slight in the eyes of God. True, God is a loving and merciful God but he is also a Righteous and Just one as well and we are all under his judgment at the appointed time. Don't think for a second that you can trivialize a sin because   God said we must be "sincere" in our love, acutally if that's the case, then we should speak out even more to the homosexual for the error in his ways and the corruption he sows to others, especially children who are easily decieved with this culture and it's stamp of approval on sodomy and fornication and a host of other sins.

But yes, we are to despise the homosexual if he is not repentant and actively engages in his debased "lifestyle". Seems many on here as well as everywhere else want some special rules for homosexuals, like in the secular world, we have to treat them and their sin like it's something special with special considerations and watch how we address them or we are to be taken as "haters" and "bigots" well you can count me out. I will call them out and name their sin, they are no better than anyone else regardless of how much browbeating and shaming we get from the immoral secularists and the powers that be from the well financed "gay" mafia that threaten and intimidate anyone in their way in getting what they want and what they want is simple; acceptance and legitimacy. We seem to be just about there, here in the "real world" where they call evil "good" and good "evil" or what they now label the "new normal".

So that's where we're at now, that even in the church we can't even call men bedding down with other men something that's "evil" and a sin which God said he hates without being called "haters" ourselves. The New Church of Sodom, open acceptance for one and all, no matter what deviancy you cling to becaue after all, God will still "wuv" you very much. Good luck with that.
Your attitude sucks. And is un-Christian. We are not to "despise the homosexual", or any human being for that matter. I suggest that you go back to the basics and re-read the Gospels.
I said when they are "unrepentant" and choose to engage in their "lifestyle" regardless when they have been convicted in their sin. God has even pointedly states that he considers homosexuality an "abomination" in the O.T. and St. Paul fiercly condemns it in almost the whole chapter of !st Romans in the N.T. God even destroyed two cities over the Sin of Sodom, a sin which the Church declares that "cries out to heaven for vengeance"

So don't worry about me, I've read and re-read scipture and Church teaching on this and it is very clear.

I'm sorry if it offends you. take it up with God.
But, is that not when they would need our love the most? Instead of despising them, should we not offer them our love and compassion? I am not saying you need to accept their lifestyle, but showing compassion and love will change their actions more than passing harsh judgement and treating them as outcasts.

"Who came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am chief." Even though I may not struggle with this particular sin, i know that my own sins are countless, and need to work out my salvation with fear and trembling, and the sum of my own sins is greater than their sins.

Call it a sin, you can back that up, I am not arguing that, but love and compassion(while not tolerance per say) is what will cause them to be repentant and change their ways, instead of harsh judgement and leperizing them, which only serves to harder their hearts to God.
 

Charles Martel

Taxiarches
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
6,805
Reaction score
0
Points
0
choy said:
Charles Martel said:
Yes, sin is evil and those in the act of sinning are evil.
This is why I believe the so-called traditionalist movement in the Roman Catholic Church is bogus.  It is spearheaded by people who mask their hate and bigotry with grandeur of Roman Catholic ritual tradition.  All they clamor is traditional externals, the traditional Mass, Latin, vestments, incense, etc.  But I have never heard of them talk about traditional Christian values of love.  Its all about judging someone for their sins or even for the type of Mass they attend.

By their fruits you will know them.  That is why I became Orthodox.
And you're judging me.

I don't get why calling sin evil and those in the act of doing it are evil in God's sight is somehow construed as "hate" and "bigotry".


And I love how your kind gets all uppidity and loves to make accusations while pontificating about tradtional "Christian luuuvvve" while you can barley contain your contempt for us nasty ol "judgmental" folk.

Christian phoneys......the worst.
 

JamesRottnek

Taxiarches
Joined
Feb 4, 2010
Messages
6,256
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Age
26
Location
Mesa, AZ
Charles Martel said:
stavros_388 said:
Charles Martel said:
JamesRottnek said:
Kerdy said:
JamesRottnek said:
Charles Martel said:
Michał Kalina said:
Charles Martel said:
Nephi said:
Charles Martel said:
Homosexual:ho·mo·sex·u·al/ˌhoʊ məˈsɛk ʃu əl or, esp. British, -ˈsɛks yu-/ Show Spelled [hoh-muh-sek-shoo-uh l or, esp. British, -seks-yoo-] Show IPA
adjective 
1. of, pertaining to, or exhibiting homosexuality.
2. of, pertaining to, or noting the same sex.
This is the problem definition. I think he's making the distinction between "homosexual (the person)" and "homosexual behavior/activities," which are very different meanings meant by "homosexual" in this context. So if one says "anti-homosexual" it could mean "anti-homosexual (the person)" or "anti-homosexual behavior/activities."
Let me ask you this.......would he make the same distinction between pedophile and pedophilia?
One is activity and one is a person.
Can you separate one from the other?

If I murder someone am I not a murderer?

If I fornicate with someone am I not a fornicator?

If I blaspheme the name of God am I not a blasphemer?

You can not do one thing and say you have nothing to do with it.
So you hate all men, yes?
Could you elaborate?  I am not clear how you came to this conclusion.
Romans 12:9, "Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good."  Is sin evil?  If it is, then Martel says we are to hate all men.
Yes, sin is evil and those in the act of sinning are evil. what do you want to hear? Do you take sin that lightly? Do you believe the Lord does? You are a fool if you take God for granted and depend soley on his mercy and love. We will all one day be held accountable for every sin, every thought, every slight in the eyes of God. True, God is a loving and merciful God but he is also a Righteous and Just one as well and we are all under his judgment at the appointed time. Don't think for a second that you can trivialize a sin because   God said we must be "sincere" in our love, acutally if that's the case, then we should speak out even more to the homosexual for the error in his ways and the corruption he sows to others, especially children who are easily decieved with this culture and it's stamp of approval on sodomy and fornication and a host of other sins.

But yes, we are to despise the homosexual if he is not repentant and actively engages in his debased "lifestyle". Seems many on here as well as everywhere else want some special rules for homosexuals, like in the secular world, we have to treat them and their sin like it's something special with special considerations and watch how we address them or we are to be taken as "haters" and "bigots" well you can count me out. I will call them out and name their sin, they are no better than anyone else regardless of how much browbeating and shaming we get from the immoral secularists and the powers that be from the well financed "gay" mafia that threaten and intimidate anyone in their way in getting what they want and what they want is simple; acceptance and legitimacy. We seem to be just about there, here in the "real world" where they call evil "good" and good "evil" or what they now label the "new normal".

So that's where we're at now, that even in the church we can't even call men bedding down with other men something that's "evil" and a sin which God said he hates without being called "haters" ourselves. The New Church of Sodom, open acceptance for one and all, no matter what deviancy you cling to becaue after all, God will still "wuv" you very much. Good luck with that.
Your attitude sucks. And is un-Christian. We are not to "despise the homosexual", or any human being for that matter. I suggest that you go back to the basics and re-read the Gospels.
I said when they are "unrepentant" and choose to engage in their "lifestyle" regardless when they have been convicted in their sin. God has even pointedly states that he considers homosexuality an "abomination" in the O.T. and St. Paul fiercly condemns it in almost the whole chapter of !st Romans in the N.T. God even destroyed two cities over the Sin of Sodom, a sin which the Church declares that "cries out to heaven for vengeance"

So don't worry about me, I've read and re-read scipture and Church teaching on this and it is very clear.

I'm sorry if it offends you. take it up with God.
Actually God never calls anything an abomination in the Old Testament.  Rather, God calls it to’ebah.  That word has a meaning closer to "unclean," than to the English "abomination."  Other examples of things called to'ebah are wearing clothes made of more than one kind of thread, eating shellfish, as is sacrificing a blemished or defective animal to God.  The first use of the term actually comes in Genesis where it is said that the Egyptians wouldn't dine with Joseph's brother, for it was to'ebah to them.  

Please get educated.
 

Shanghaiski

Taxiarches
Joined
Dec 26, 2009
Messages
7,982
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Age
41
Location
Wisconsin, USA
TheMathematician said:
Charles Martel said:
stavros_388 said:
Charles Martel said:
JamesRottnek said:
Kerdy said:
JamesRottnek said:
Charles Martel said:
Michał Kalina said:
Charles Martel said:
Nephi said:
Charles Martel said:
Homosexual:ho·mo·sex·u·al/ˌhoʊ məˈsɛk ʃu əl or, esp. British, -ˈsɛks yu-/ Show Spelled [hoh-muh-sek-shoo-uh l or, esp. British, -seks-yoo-] Show IPA
adjective 
1. of, pertaining to, or exhibiting homosexuality.
2. of, pertaining to, or noting the same sex.
This is the problem definition. I think he's making the distinction between "homosexual (the person)" and "homosexual behavior/activities," which are very different meanings meant by "homosexual" in this context. So if one says "anti-homosexual" it could mean "anti-homosexual (the person)" or "anti-homosexual behavior/activities."
Let me ask you this.......would he make the same distinction between pedophile and pedophilia?
One is activity and one is a person.
Can you separate one from the other?

If I murder someone am I not a murderer?

If I fornicate with someone am I not a fornicator?

If I blaspheme the name of God am I not a blasphemer?

You can not do one thing and say you have nothing to do with it.
So you hate all men, yes?
Could you elaborate?  I am not clear how you came to this conclusion.
Romans 12:9, "Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good."  Is sin evil?  If it is, then Martel says we are to hate all men.
Yes, sin is evil and those in the act of sinning are evil. what do you want to hear? Do you take sin that lightly? Do you believe the Lord does? You are a fool if you take God for granted and depend soley on his mercy and love. We will all one day be held accountable for every sin, every thought, every slight in the eyes of God. True, God is a loving and merciful God but he is also a Righteous and Just one as well and we are all under his judgment at the appointed time. Don't think for a second that you can trivialize a sin because   God said we must be "sincere" in our love, acutally if that's the case, then we should speak out even more to the homosexual for the error in his ways and the corruption he sows to others, especially children who are easily decieved with this culture and it's stamp of approval on sodomy and fornication and a host of other sins.

But yes, we are to despise the homosexual if he is not repentant and actively engages in his debased "lifestyle". Seems many on here as well as everywhere else want some special rules for homosexuals, like in the secular world, we have to treat them and their sin like it's something special with special considerations and watch how we address them or we are to be taken as "haters" and "bigots" well you can count me out. I will call them out and name their sin, they are no better than anyone else regardless of how much browbeating and shaming we get from the immoral secularists and the powers that be from the well financed "gay" mafia that threaten and intimidate anyone in their way in getting what they want and what they want is simple; acceptance and legitimacy. We seem to be just about there, here in the "real world" where they call evil "good" and good "evil" or what they now label the "new normal".

So that's where we're at now, that even in the church we can't even call men bedding down with other men something that's "evil" and a sin which God said he hates without being called "haters" ourselves. The New Church of Sodom, open acceptance for one and all, no matter what deviancy you cling to becaue after all, God will still "wuv" you very much. Good luck with that.
Your attitude sucks. And is un-Christian. We are not to "despise the homosexual", or any human being for that matter. I suggest that you go back to the basics and re-read the Gospels.
I said when they are "unrepentant" and choose to engage in their "lifestyle" regardless when they have been convicted in their sin. God has even pointedly states that he considers homosexuality an "abomination" in the O.T. and St. Paul fiercly condemns it in almost the whole chapter of !st Romans in the N.T. God even destroyed two cities over the Sin of Sodom, a sin which the Church declares that "cries out to heaven for vengeance"

So don't worry about me, I've read and re-read scipture and Church teaching on this and it is very clear.

I'm sorry if it offends you. take it up with God.
But, is that not when they would need our love the most? Instead of despising them, should we not offer them our love and compassion? I am not saying you need to accept their lifestyle, but showing compassion and love will change their actions more than passing harsh judgement and treating them as outcasts.

"Who came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am chief." Even though I may not struggle with this particular sin, i know that my own sins are countless, and need to work out my salvation with fear and trembling, and the sum of my own sins is greater than their sins.

Call it a sin, you can back that up, I am not arguing that, but love and compassion(while not tolerance per say) is what will cause them to be repentant and change their ways, instead of harsh judgement and leperizing them, which only serves to harder their hearts to God.
Maybe I missed something in the thread--I haven't read it all. But I think it's hard to generalize. We are commanded to love everyone. And the saints show us by their example that even the most sinful person is still better than I am. Moreover, as long as we are in this life, repentance and redemption is possible--indeed God is working toward this.

So, how do we show love? It can be done in many ways and usually depends on the situation and the people involved. This takes discernment, which is a rare virtue.

Not having discernment, we need to do the best we can with what we have. It is likely that, whatever we say, we will not be listened to. Particularly if in this case the homosexual person has fallen for the lies coming from those who promote the lifestyle. I think that's why a lot of people simply fall back on stating it is sinful and then leaving it at that.

Now, there are many people with temptations who have taken up the valiant struggle against them in the Church--which is as it should be. Every day, they have to put up with people in the Church saying that what they're bravely fighting is not sin, and that they should just give up, because some of these so-called Christians are motivated by what they call love, but is in fact hatred in disguise.

In the battle with this particular sin--given the general climate--showing love to the sinner is standing with him in his fight against the sin, encouraging him to keep fighting, not to give up and give in. This is the case with any other sin, actually.
 

Shanghaiski

Taxiarches
Joined
Dec 26, 2009
Messages
7,982
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Age
41
Location
Wisconsin, USA
JamesRottnek said:
Charles Martel said:
stavros_388 said:
Charles Martel said:
JamesRottnek said:
Kerdy said:
JamesRottnek said:
Charles Martel said:
Michał Kalina said:
Charles Martel said:
Nephi said:
Charles Martel said:
Homosexual:ho·mo·sex·u·al/ˌhoʊ məˈsɛk ʃu əl or, esp. British, -ˈsɛks yu-/ Show Spelled [hoh-muh-sek-shoo-uh l or, esp. British, -seks-yoo-] Show IPA
adjective 
1. of, pertaining to, or exhibiting homosexuality.
2. of, pertaining to, or noting the same sex.
This is the problem definition. I think he's making the distinction between "homosexual (the person)" and "homosexual behavior/activities," which are very different meanings meant by "homosexual" in this context. So if one says "anti-homosexual" it could mean "anti-homosexual (the person)" or "anti-homosexual behavior/activities."
Let me ask you this.......would he make the same distinction between pedophile and pedophilia?
One is activity and one is a person.
Can you separate one from the other?

If I murder someone am I not a murderer?

If I fornicate with someone am I not a fornicator?

If I blaspheme the name of God am I not a blasphemer?

You can not do one thing and say you have nothing to do with it.
So you hate all men, yes?
Could you elaborate?  I am not clear how you came to this conclusion.
Romans 12:9, "Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good."  Is sin evil?  If it is, then Martel says we are to hate all men.
Yes, sin is evil and those in the act of sinning are evil. what do you want to hear? Do you take sin that lightly? Do you believe the Lord does? You are a fool if you take God for granted and depend soley on his mercy and love. We will all one day be held accountable for every sin, every thought, every slight in the eyes of God. True, God is a loving and merciful God but he is also a Righteous and Just one as well and we are all under his judgment at the appointed time. Don't think for a second that you can trivialize a sin because   God said we must be "sincere" in our love, acutally if that's the case, then we should speak out even more to the homosexual for the error in his ways and the corruption he sows to others, especially children who are easily decieved with this culture and it's stamp of approval on sodomy and fornication and a host of other sins.

But yes, we are to despise the homosexual if he is not repentant and actively engages in his debased "lifestyle". Seems many on here as well as everywhere else want some special rules for homosexuals, like in the secular world, we have to treat them and their sin like it's something special with special considerations and watch how we address them or we are to be taken as "haters" and "bigots" well you can count me out. I will call them out and name their sin, they are no better than anyone else regardless of how much browbeating and shaming we get from the immoral secularists and the powers that be from the well financed "gay" mafia that threaten and intimidate anyone in their way in getting what they want and what they want is simple; acceptance and legitimacy. We seem to be just about there, here in the "real world" where they call evil "good" and good "evil" or what they now label the "new normal".

So that's where we're at now, that even in the church we can't even call men bedding down with other men something that's "evil" and a sin which God said he hates without being called "haters" ourselves. The New Church of Sodom, open acceptance for one and all, no matter what deviancy you cling to becaue after all, God will still "wuv" you very much. Good luck with that.
Your attitude sucks. And is un-Christian. We are not to "despise the homosexual", or any human being for that matter. I suggest that you go back to the basics and re-read the Gospels.
I said when they are "unrepentant" and choose to engage in their "lifestyle" regardless when they have been convicted in their sin. God has even pointedly states that he considers homosexuality an "abomination" in the O.T. and St. Paul fiercly condemns it in almost the whole chapter of !st Romans in the N.T. God even destroyed two cities over the Sin of Sodom, a sin which the Church declares that "cries out to heaven for vengeance"

So don't worry about me, I've read and re-read scipture and Church teaching on this and it is very clear.

I'm sorry if it offends you. take it up with God.
Actually God never calls anything an abomination in the Old Testament.  Rather, God calls it to’ebah.  That word has a meaning closer to "unclean," than to the English "abomination."  Other examples of things called to'ebah are wearing clothes made of more than one kind of thread, eating shellfish, as is sacrificing a blemished or defective animal to God.  The first use of the term actually comes in Genesis where it is said that the Egyptians wouldn't dine with Joseph's brother, for it was to'ebah to them.  

Please get educated.
I've heard the word in Greek apparently translates to "wanting to throw up." So there you go.
 
Top