NY Gay Marriage Vote and the American Bishops

[woodpeace]

In his post dated 4th April 2012 Elvisman uses the term "homosexual lifestyle" several times. There is no such thing, neither is there a heterosexual lifestyle. It is offensive and reductive to characterize gay and lesbian relationships as being solely sexual.

Unless by homosexual lifestyle is meant activities such as reading books by Armistead Maupin, listening to albums by k.d. lang, watching films with homosexual characters/homosexual themes, owning posters and/or photos of Judy Garland and/or other gay icons.

 

[rayodeluz]

Thank you for making my point ever-so-clear.
What you are advocating is moral relativism and that's been, my point all along.

First of all, you need to understand that there is only ONE truth (John 4:19) - not tens of thousands of versions of it.
The next thing you neet to realize is that Jesus only established ONE Church. At the Last Supper - He prayed fervently that this ONE Church remain ONE - as He and the Father are ONE (John 17:20-23).
The Church - the ONE Church is the fullness of Christ (Eph. 1:22-23).

Regardles of dissention and individual dissidents - they can be wrong in matters of faith and morals but the Church CANNOT be (John 16:12-15, 1 Tim. 3:15).

The next thing you need to understand is the nobody is "pontificating" about anything. I am merely a parrot for the Church, which is the Body of Christ. I don't off my opinions when it comes to the Truth because they don't mean a thing if they rebut the Truth - and neither do your opinions. People like you refuse to be obedient to the Church either because of ignorance of the Scriptures or some sort of spiritual pride and obstinacy. I suggest you swallow that pride and listen to the Church which is Christ's FULL aAuthority on earth.

If you personally reject the Authority of the Church - that is your perogative, just as it is your perogative to anything else the Church has to say about anything including homosexual union. As I have already pointed out that the Scriptures - the written Word of God Almighty states that homosexual behavior is an abomination in the eyes of God. When pseudo-"Catholics" reject the Word of God on the matter, there are nothing more than Protestants because they have rejected Christ Himself (Luke 10:16).

Finally - you state that your Protestant friends make claims about the Catholic Church involving itself in "un-Biblical" practices which is about the most preposterous part of your post. EVERY single Church ecclesial community in the 21st century doies things that were not and could not be done in the early Church. However - the Catholic Church does not practice ANYTHING that is ANTI-Biblical, whereas every other Protestant community DOES.
Rejecting the Real Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist is first and foremost on the list.

Some other unbiblical Protestant practices and doctrines include the pre-trib Rapture, Invisible Church, Accepting Christ as Lord and Savior, Limited Atonement, Altar Call, Once saved-Aways saved, Dedications and Rededication, Re-Baptism, etc.

I have YET to debate any Protestant who can point out one single "anti-Biblibal" practice of the Catholic Church and I would issue the same challenge to you . . .

I understand that you're "parroting" for the RCC. That's OK if you want to make clear the official position of the RCC on a specific matter. The rest of your post is ridiculous.

You say there's only one truth, and no doubt there is. No one has it down perfectly, but only you and the RCC is right and everyone else is wrong? LOL! What an unbelievable display of arrogance! You also have a lot of nerve to claim I'm ignorant about scripture, but I'll let that go for now for lack of time.

The written Word of God states that homosexuality is an abomination? True. So is eating certain meats that Catholics have no problem with now. Paul also states we're no longer bound by law if we live by faith, and there's nothing unlawful to him (but still may not be expediant - read Corinthians), and he speaks of Christian liberty (Romans 14). I guess that part of the written Word of God is not important though. Let's just pick and choose from the Bible what to believe. And since you're so hung up on homosexuality, you should read the many places on this forum where people have shown how verses such as in Romans 1 have been taken out of context.

Yes, I did state I've met some protestants (never said they were friends, but don't let that stop you from making things up) who are very devout, very conservative, and who trash the RCC. And that is exactly what they believe, so why is that part of my post preposterous? That's what they believe, and I stated I don't agree with them. Why do you issue challenges to ME about what THEY say?

Finally, in a previous post I replied to Martin that the reason I don't come here much anymore is pretty much what he said. This site is tough for anyone liberal-minded. Conservatives love to come to the liberal boards and start in with "how right they are, and how wrong we are." He was speaking in general terms (I didn't see him name anyone), and he spoke the truth. I replied that I agreed, and that also was the truth. Yet later you quote us and then say thou shall not bear false witness against thy neighbor. Well, we didn’t. The fact that you quote us and then mention that commandment implies that we broke it, or to say it another way, you accuse us of breaking it when we didn’t. So that makes YOU guilty of……..wait for it……….bearing false witness against your neighbor.

Your good at quoting Catholic dogma, but the rest of your posts tend to be filled with so much illogic and twisting of what I actually said that it’s hard to know where to start with them. It does make for some amusing reading though.

 

[rayodeluz]

In his post dated 4th April 2012 Elvisman uses the term "homosexual lifestyle" several times. There is no such thing, neither is there a heterosexual lifestyle. It is offensive and reductive to characterize gay and lesbian relationships as being solely sexual.

Unless by homosexual lifestyle is meant activities such as reading books by Armistead Maupin, listening to albums by k.d. lang, watching films with homosexual characters/homosexual themes, owning posters and/or photos of Judy Garland and/or other gay icons.

You mean to say that gays don't wake up at a gay time, eat a gay breakfast, go to their gay jobs, return to their gay home after they finish their gay work, drink a gay beer and watch a gay TV show (or maybe go to the gay McDonlad's as opposed to the heterosexual one), etc. Wow! Who'd have thunk it!

 

[Elvisman]

In his post dated 4th April 2012 Elvisman uses the term "homosexual lifestyle" several times. There is no such thing, neither is there a heterosexual lifestyle. It is offensive and reductive to characterize gay and lesbian relationships as being solely sexual.

Unless by homosexual lifestyle is meant activities such as reading books by Armistead Maupin, listening to albums by k.d. lang, watching films with homosexual characters/homosexual themes, owning posters and/or photos of Judy Garland and/or other gay icons.

I use the term "Homosexual Lifestyle" so as to avoid using terms like "Sodomy" or "disordered sexual activity". I was merely trying to keep the conversation G-rated so as not to offend those with delicate sensibilities.
However - if you want to take the conversation to a more realistic and gritty level - then let's go.

As for male homosexuals and lesbians, I am offended at the hijacking of the word, "gay" - which simply means "happy". I would rather call it what it is: Homosexuality, which is gravely disordered.
I've had many homosexual friends through work and most of them were anything BUT gay (happy).

Now, all of that being said, I have already presented some Scripture verses that declare homosexual behavior to be sinful and disordered.
If you want to have a serious CHRISTIAN discussion on the subject, then the Scriptures need to be presented. Show me ANYWHERE in Scripture where sexual relations between 2 people of the same sex is lauded as beautiful, natural or normal.

Lev. 18:22
You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; such a thing is an abomination.

Lev. 20:13
If a man lies with a male as with a woman, they have committed an abomination; the two of them shall be put to death; their bloodguilt is upon them.

Rom. 1:26-28
Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another.
Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity.And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God handed them over to their undiscerning mind to do what is improper.

 

[Elvisman]

I understand that you're "parroting" for the RCC. That's OK if you want to make clear the official position of the RCC on a specific matter. The rest of your post is ridiculous.

You say there's only one truth, and no doubt there is. No one has it down perfectly, but only you and the RCC is right and everyone else is wrong? LOL! What an unbelievable display of arrogance! You also have a lot of nerve to claim I'm ignorant about scripture, but I'll let that go for now for lack of time.

The written Word of God states that homosexuality is an abomination? True. So is eating certain meats that Catholics have no problem with now. Paul also states we're no longer bound by law if we live by faith, and there's nothing unlawful to him (but still may not be expediant - read Corinthians), and he speaks of Christian liberty (Romans 14). I guess that part of the written Word of God is not important though. Let's just pick and choose from the Bible what to believe. And since you're so hung up on homosexuality, you should read the many places on this forum where people have shown how verses such as in Romans 1 have been taken out of context.

Yes, I did state I've met some protestants (never said they were friends, but don't let that stop you from making things up) who are very devout, very conservative, and who trash the RCC. And that is exactly what they believe, so why is that part of my post preposterous? That's what they believe, and I stated I don't agree with them. Why do you issue challenges to ME about what THEY say?

Finally, in a previous post I replied to Martin that the reason I don't come here much anymore is pretty much what he said. This site is tough for anyone liberal-minded. Conservatives love to come to the liberal boards and start in with "how right they are, and how wrong we are." He was speaking in general terms (I didn't see him name anyone), and he spoke the truth. I replied that I agreed, and that also was the truth. Yet later you quote us and then say thou shall not bear false witness against thy neighbor. Well, we didn’t. The fact that you quote us and then mention that commandment implies that we broke it, or to say it another way, you accuse us of breaking it when we didn’t. So that makes YOU guilty of……..wait for it……….bearing false witness against your neighbor.

Your good at quoting Catholic dogma, but the rest of your posts tend to be filled with so much illogic and twisting of what I actually said that it’s hard to know where to start with them. It does make for some amusing reading though.

Seriously?
You actually think that because the Old Law was fulfilled that we are no longer bound by the MORAL Law?? You mean that I can go on a killing and raping rampage and there is no consequence for this? This is PRECISELY why I say that you and others are Scripturally ignorant.

As for what your Protestant friends think about the Catholic Chruch – the only reason I said that it was preposterous of you to bring that up is because you were using it as some sort of bizarre reasning to illustrate that the Church isn’t always right about faith and morals. Regardless of what other man-made denominations believe – the truth is the TRUTH and only ONE Church was guaranteed to be led to ALL truth (John 16:12-15). Only ONE Church is called the pillar and foundation of Truth (Eph. 1:22-23).

As for “liberal-minded” – I would never accuse you of being liberal-minded.Unfortunately, the word, “Liberal” was hijacked by people of your ilk to mean “rebellious” instead of truly liberated in Christ . . .

 

[Elvisman]

repeat post ...

 

[rayodeluz]

Seriously?

You actually think that because the Old Law was fulfilled that we are no longer bound by the MORAL Law?? You mean that I can go on a killing and raping rampage and there is no consequence for this? This is PRECISELY why I say that you and others are Scripturally ignorant.

As for what your Protestant friends think about the Catholic Chruch – the only reason I said that it was preposterous of you to bring that up is because you were using it as some sort of bizarre reasning to illustrate that the Church isn’t always right about faith and morals. Regardless of what other man-made denominations believe – the truth is the TRUTH and only ONE Church was guaranteed to be led to ALL truth (John 16:12-15). Only ONE Church is called the pillar and foundation of Truth (Eph. 1:22-23).

As for “liberal-minded” – I would never accuse you of being liberal-minded.Unfortunately, the word, “Liberal” was hijacked by people of your ilk to mean “rebellious” instead of truly liberated in Christ . . .

And your response not only shows exactly how ignorant YOU are about scripture, but also that you seem to lack the ability to process information presented to you and to think critically.

First of all, show me where I said you can go on killing, raping, etc. Save your time, but I never said any such thing (but again, don’t let facts prevent you from making up lies). I’ll let you do the research yourself so that you may learn something, but the fact is the law that was fulfilled was Mosaic Law (i.e. what’s in Leviticus, etc.). The 10 Commandments are still in effect. There IS a difference between them since the 10 Commandments are not part of Mosaic law. And don’t forget the new commandment that Jesus gave us: to love one another as He has loved us. Oh yes, you will find an essentially similar law in OT law about that, so why did Jesus give it to us as a new commandment? Surely a Bible scholar such as yourself knows the answer, so I don't have to say why here. Anyway, we both know what Jersus said were the 2 greatest commandments, and they're pretty much summed up in the 10 commandments plus Jesus' new one. And if we are bound by them and choose to follow Jesus´teaching, then we won't go around killing, raping, etc. It's not that difficult to understand.

As far as my mentioning of my protestant "friends" go (why you insist on calling them my "friends" is beyond me since I've already told you they are NOT my friends; only ones I've met. What part of that don't you understand?), I wasn't using to illustrate that the RCC was wrong. The purpose was to show you that there are other very devout Christians, who I'll bet can out Bible-quote you any day, who think the RCC is evil, is un-Biblical, the great wXXXX, etc., and....here is the point.....they are just as Biblically convinced of their truth as you are of yours. I said don't agree with them. I think they're very obnoxious, self-righteous, and arrogant in their views, but there is no doubting their faith nor their knowledge of Bible. I question their interpretations of scripture, but can't deny they truly believe. And from your posts, that's the same opinion I've developed about you. So to me, you and they are no different in that regard. So if we mere, ignorant mortals were to listen to you both, whom should we believe?

I've lived in Mexico for the past 6 years. I attend RCC mass here every Sunday. Speaking only for the Parish I've attended, the priest has only spoken about the Gospel, what Jesus did for us, that we must have faith, peace, love, compassion, care for the poor, etc. The Pope was here a couple of weeks ago, and it was absolutely mind blowing. The Pope spoke along the same lines. There was an outpouring of love from the visit that can't be explained in human terms. There was and has been no legalism, judgement, arrogance, etc. in the masses I've attend nor the Pope's visit. It's what Christianity can and should be. It's exactly why I love the RCC.

Then we come to people like my "protestant friends" and you. Full of the legalistic, judegmental, self-righteous, holier-than-thou, I'm right and everyone else is wrong, attitude that is anything but Chrisitan. That's exactly what drives people away from Christianity and Jesus. We're supposed to be fishers of men. Do you really think the attitude that you express brings people to Jesus? Not a bit. It chases people away, and Satan himself couldn't do a better job. We need to do what the Pope did here, and I know you're capable of it if you would only open up your heart a little and let the love of Christ in instead of only the arrogant, legal, holier-than-thou stuff. Start with the 2 greatest commandments. Show people you have a love for God. Then show them you love them through kindness, compassion, being non-judgemental, etc. All the things that Jesus taught. It really does work wonders, and accomplishes more than the fire-and-brimstone can ever do. May Christ's peace be with you.

 

[rayodeluz]

If you want to have a serious CHRISTIAN discussion on the subject, then the Scriptures need to be presented. Show me ANYWHERE in Scripture where sexual relations between 2 people of the same sex is lauded as beautiful, natural or normal.

Lev. 18:22
You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; such a thing is an abomination.

Lev. 20:13
If a man lies with a male as with a woman, they have committed an abomination; the two of them shall be put to death; their bloodguilt is upon them.

Rom. 1:26-28
Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another.
Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity.And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God handed them over to their undiscerning mind to do what is improper.

This truly is not a topic that concerns me, and one I won't participate in except for this post. Just want to say that this topic and these verses have been debated to death here and on other subforums of CF. Research them and you'll see (I'm sure you won't agree, but at least you'll see why others disagree with you) where others explain how the Romans 1 verses are taken out of context and how Levitcus doesn't apply today and never applied to non-Jews. No point in rehashing this old topic when it's already out there.

 

[Elvisman]

This truly is not a topic that concerns me, and one I won't participate in except for this post. Just want to say that this topic and these verses have been debated to death here and on other subforums of CF. Research them and you'll see (I'm sure you won't agree, but at least you'll see why others disagree with you) where others explain how the Romans 1 verses are taken out of context and how Levitcus doesn't apply today and never applied to non-Jews. No point in rehashing this old topic when it's already out there.

You forget that the Bible tells us to admonish the unruly – to correct and reprove (Matt. 18:15-18, Luke 17:3, 2 Tim. 4:2, Gal. 6:1).

I am a defender of the faith. This means that I will not allow relativists and other anti-Catholics to misrepresent the Church’s teachings. People like you decry the words of those of us who defend the faith as “intolerant”. As G. K. Chesterton so aptly described you and your ilk:
“Tolerance is the virtue of a man without convictions."

Whether a non-Catholic can Scripturally “out-quote” a Catholic is totally irrelevant. Memorizing the Scriptures doesn’t matter one, single bit if you don’t understand them. I, too, know many Protestants who can rattle of virtually any Biblical verse – and they are as ignorant about the meaning of those verses than the next guy is.

Protestant doctrines which differ from the Church have been INVENTED by men during and since the Protestant Revolt. The fact that they are convinced of these invented “truths” is irrelevant to the REAL truth.

Jesus didn’t teach contradicting or opposite version of the truth. He only preached the ONE and ONLY truth, which is echoed by his Body, the Church to this day.

You speak of what a wonderful experience it was to see and hear Benedict XVI and what a wonderful example of Christian love and understanding he is. That’s great. However, he is also an ardent defender of the truth and unbending when it comes to the truth. Read what he has to say about relativists like you, which he says is the worst blight within the Church today. According to him, the “Dictatorship of Relativism” is what is condemning people’s souls more than any other thing.

All of this “your truth vs. my truth” absurdity is precisely what he is talking about. This thread is about how many of you pseudo-Catholics are complaining about how the U.S. Bishops decrying the NY law supporting homosexual “marriage”. If you truly were faithful Catholics, you would be on their side.
Pope Benedict XVI certainly is . . .

 

[Elvisman]

This truly is not a topic that concerns me, and one I won't participate in except for this post. Just want to say that this topic and these verses have been debated to death here and on other subforums of CF. Research them and you'll see (I'm sure you won't agree, but at least you'll see why others disagree with you) where others explain how the Romans 1 verses are taken out of context and how Levitcus doesn't apply today and never applied to non-Jews. No point in rehashing this old topic when it's already out there.

I have been a member of the largest discussion/debate forums on the internet for about ten years now and have heard virtually every side of this argument. The points you make about these verses of Scriptures not being relevant to Christians today is nothing but rationalization for sin.

You think Romans 1 is taken out of context?? Well, here it is - in CONTEXT. Explain to me how this does not apply to us today:

Rom 1:18-32
The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.

Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.

Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

 

[createdtoworship]

It's not prejudiced or discriminatory to vote against homosexual marriage. Here is why- It is not legal for me or anyone to marry the same sex. Does that make sense? Me, a heterosexual cannot marry the same sex in the same manner that a homosexual person cannot marry the same sex. Not prejudiced at all. We are all equal under proposition 8 (in California)

 

[rayodeluz]

You forget that the Bible tells us to admonish the unruly – to correct and reprove (Matt. 18:15-18, Luke 17:3, 2 Tim. 4:2, Gal. 6:1).

I am a defender of the faith. This means that I will not allow relativists and other anti-Catholics to misrepresent the Church’s teachings. People like you decry the words of those of us who defend the faith as “intolerant”. As G. K. Chesterton so aptly described you and your ilk:
“Tolerance is the virtue of a man without convictions."

Whether a non-Catholic can Scripturally “out-quote” a Catholic is totally irrelevant. Memorizing the Scriptures doesn’t matter one, single bit if you don’t understand them. I, too, know many Protestants who can rattle of virtually any Biblical verse – and they are as ignorant about the meaning of those verses than the next guy is.

Protestant doctrines which differ from the Church have been INVENTED by men during and since the Protestant Revolt. The fact that they are convinced of these invented “truths” is irrelevant to the REAL truth.

Jesus didn’t teach contradicting or opposite version of the truth. He only preached the ONE and ONLY truth, which is echoed by his Body, the Church to this day.

You speak of what a wonderful experience it was to see and hear Benedict XVI and what a wonderful example of Christian love and understanding he is. That’s great. However, he is also an ardent defender of the truth and unbending when it comes to the truth. Read what he has to say about relativists like you, which he says is the worst blight within the Church today. According to him, the “Dictatorship of Relativism” is what is condemning people’s souls more than any other thing.

All of this “your truth vs. my truth” absurdity is precisely what he is talking about. This thread is about how many of you pseudo-Catholics are complaining about how the U.S. Bishops decrying the NY law supporting homosexual “marriage”. If you truly were faithful Catholics, you would be on their side.
Pope Benedict XVI certainly is . . .

Yawn....are you done ranting now? You can defend the teachings of RCC to your hearts content. You can make the false accusations that you do towards me to your hearts content. I do not really care. You are correct that there are people who are ignorant about the meaning of scripture. You have proven yourself to be one of them, but it may not be your fault. Your posts have convinced me that you are suffering from some kind of paranoid delusion or other mental illness. Anyone who thinks that only they have the real truth and anyone else who does not think the same way is automatically wrong needs some professional help. You cannot even understand basic English. Read what you wrote in response to my last post......


I have been a member of the largest discussion/debate forums on the internet for about ten years now and have heard virtually every side of this argument. The points you make about these verses of Scriptures not being relevant to Christians today is nothing but rationalization for sin.
You think Romans 1 is taken out of context?? Well, here it is - in CONTEXT. Explain to me how this does not apply to us today


.........Now go back and read what I wrote. Not once did I say I thought Romans 1 was taken out of context. I said there are others who do. Yet you go and misquote me AGAIN. Just what is your problem? As far as what I said about what Scripture is not applicable to Christians today, I just said that we are not bound by OT law because of our faith in Jesus. Now if you have a problem with that then you do not believe the Bible, because that is EXACTLY what is in the Bible. I doubt I will continue to respond to your idiotic nonsense. You are a lost cause.

 

[Elvisman]

Yawn....are you done ranting now? You can defend the teachings of RCC to your hearts content. You can make the false accusations that you do towards me to your hearts content. I do not really care. You are correct that there are people who are ignorant about the meaning of scripture. You have proven yourself to be one of them, but it may not be your fault. Your posts have convinced me that you are suffering from some kind of paranoid delusion or other mental illness. Anyone who thinks that only they have the real truth and anyone else who does not think the same way is automatically wrong needs some professional help. You cannot even understand basic English. Read what you wrote in response to my last post......

I have been a member of the largest discussion/debate forums on the internet for about ten years now and have heard virtually every side of this argument. The points you make about these verses of Scriptures not being relevant to Christians today is nothing but rationalization for sin.
You think Romans 1 is taken out of context?? Well, here it is - in CONTEXT. Explain to me how this does not apply to us today

.........Now go back and read what I wrote. Not once did I say I thought Romans 1 was taken out of context. I said there are others who do. Yet you go and misquote me AGAIN. Just what is your problem? As far as what I said about what Scripture is not applicable to Christians today, I just said that we are not bound by OT law because of our faith in Jesus. Now if you have a problem with that then you do not believe the Bible, because that is EXACTLY what is in the Bible. I doubt I will continue to respond to your idiotic nonsense. You are a lost cause.

So, you think that because we are not bound by the Mosaic Law - that this somehow makes Homosexual behavior okay with God? I have given you the Scriptures that say homosexual behavior is an abomination before the Lord. This is not a matter of Mosaic Law vs. the New Covenant. When something is an abomination to God - it's ALWAYS an abomination.
Which part of that do you NOT understand?

As for anybody not agreeing with me being wrong - or my "opinions" - I already told you:
I don't give my opinions on matters of faith and morals. I simply parrot the Chjurch's position. My words have no authority.
The Church's position, however, is God's position.

If you have a problem with that - take it up with HIM. He's the one who gave the Church complete and total Authority on earth . . .

 

[rayodeluz]

So, you think that because we are not bound by the Mosaic Law - that this somehow makes Homosexual behavior okay with God? I have given you the Scriptures that say homosexual behavior is an abomination before the Lord. This is not a matter of Mosaic Law vs. the New Covenant. When something is an abomination to God - it's ALWAYS an abomination.
Which part of that do you NOT understand?.

Oh really? Well lets see. We have this....


Leviticus 11 KJV - And the LORD spake unto Moses and to - Bible Gateway


And then we have this...


Acts 11 KJV - And the apostles and brethren that were - Bible Gateway


So God made clean what once was an abomination. BTW, I am not the one who said we are not bound by OT law. That is what Paul said. If you do not want to believe the Bible that is fine with me. It is truly amazing how you limit God to only what the Catholic church says about Him. It is quite apparent you do not have a high opinion about God or Jesus, but rather only about the RCC. You are the one that will have a problem with Him, not me.

If you have a problem with that - take it up with HIM. He's the one who gave the Church complete and total Authority on earth . . .

Again, the trinity is the Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost. It is not the Father, Son, and the RCC. If you want to worship and put your faith in the RCC then you go right ahead and do that. I will stick with Jesus. And just for your reading pleasure......

Are Catholic beliefs and practices biblical?

Question: "Are Catholic beliefs and practices biblical?"

Answer: The issue concerning any church and its practices should be “Is this biblical?” If a teaching is Biblical (taken in context), it should be embraced. If it is not, it should be rejected. God is more interested in whether a church is doing His will and obeying His Word than whether it can trace a line of succession back to Jesus’ apostles. Jesus was very concerned about abandoning the Word of God to follow the traditions of men (Mark 7:7). Traditions are not inherently invalid…there are some good and valuable traditions. Again, the issue must be whether a doctrine, practice, or tradition is Biblical. How then does the Roman Catholic Church compare with the teachings of the Word of God?

Salvation: The Roman Catholic Church teaches that salvation is by baptismal regeneration and is maintained through the Catholic sacraments unless a willful act of sin is committed that breaks the state of sanctifying grace. The Bible teaches that we are saved by grace which is received through simple faith (Ephesians 2:8-9), and that good works are the result of a change of the heart wrought in salvation (Ephesians 2:10; 2 Corinthians 5:17) and the fruit of that new life in Christ (John 15).

Assurance of salvation: The Roman Catholic Church teaches that salvation cannot be guaranteed or assured. 1 John 5:13 states that the letter of 1 John was written for the purpose of assuring believers of the CERTAINTY of their salvation.

Good Works: The Roman Catholic Church states that Christians are saved by meritorious works (beginning with baptism) and that salvation is maintained by good works (receiving the sacraments, confession of sin to a priest, etc.) The Bible states that Christians are saved by grace through faith, totally apart from works (Titus 3:5; Ephesians 2:8-9; Galatians 3:10-11; Romans 3:19-24).

Baptism: In the New Testament baptism is ALWAYS practiced AFTER saving faith in Christ. Baptism is not the means of salvation; it is faith in the Gospel that saves (1 Corinthians 1:14-18; Romans 10:13-17). The Roman Catholic Church teaches baptismal regeneration of infants, a practice never found in Scripture. The only possible hint of infant baptism in the Bible that the Roman Catholic Church can point to is that the whole household of the Philippian jailer was baptized in Acts 16:33. However, the context nowhere mentions infants. Acts 16:31 declares that salvation is by faith. Paul spoke to all of the household in verse 32, and the whole household believed (verse 34). This passage only supports the baptism of those who have already believed, not of infants.

Prayer: The Roman Catholic Church teaches Catholics to not only pray to God, but also to petition Mary and the saints for their prayers. Contrary to this, we are taught in Scripture to only pray to God (Matthew 6:9; Luke 18:1-7).

Priesthood: The Roman Catholic Church teaches that there is a distinction between the clergy and the “lay people,” whereas the New Testament teaches the priesthood of all believers (1 Peter 2:9).

Sacraments: The Roman Catholic Church teaches that a believer is infused with grace upon reception of the sacraments. Such teaching is nowhere found in Scripture.

Confession: The Roman Catholic Church teaches that unless a believer is hindered, the only way to receive the forgiveness of sins is by confessing them to a priest. Contrary to this, Scripture teaches that confession of sins is to be made to God (1 John 1:9).

Mary: The Roman Catholic Church teaches, among other things, that Mary is the Queen of Heaven, a perpetual virgin, and the co-redemptress who ascended into heaven. In Scripture, she is portrayed as an obedient, believing servant of God, who became the mother of Jesus. None of the other attributes mentioned by the Roman Catholic Church have any basis in the Bible. The idea of Mary being the co-redemptress and another mediator between God and man is not only extra-biblical (found only outside of Scripture), but is also unbiblical (contrary to Scripture). Acts 4:12 declares that Jesus is the only redeemer. 1 Timothy 2:5 proclaims that Jesus is the only mediator between God and men.

Many other examples could be given. These issues alone clearly identify the Catholic Church as being unbiblical. Every Christian denomination has traditions and practices that are not explicitly based on Scripture. That is why Scripture must be the standard of Christian faith and practice. The Word of God is always true and reliable. The same cannot be said of church tradition. Our guideline is to be: “What does Scripture say?” (Romans 4:3; Galatians 4:30; Acts 17:11). 2 Timothy 3:16-17 declares, “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.”

 

[createdtoworship]

Oh really? Well lets see. We have this....


Leviticus 11 KJV - And the LORD spake unto Moses and to - Bible Gateway


And then we have this...


Acts 11 KJV - And the apostles and brethren that were - Bible Gateway


So God made clean what once was an abomination. BTW, I am not the one who said we are not bound by OT law. That is what Paul said. If you do not want to believe the Bible that is fine with me. It is truly amazing how you limit God to only what the Catholic church says about Him. It is quite apparent you do not have a high opinion about God or Jesus, but rather only about the RCC. You are the one that will have a problem with Him, not me.



Again, the trinity is the Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost. It is not the Father, Son, and the RCC. If you want to worship and put your faith in the RCC then you go right ahead and do that. I will stick with Jesus. And just for your reading pleasure......

Are Catholic beliefs and practices biblical?

Question: "Are Catholic beliefs and practices biblical?"

Answer: The issue concerning any church and its practices should be “Is this biblical?” If a teaching is Biblical (taken in context), it should be embraced. If it is not, it should be rejected. God is more interested in whether a church is doing His will and obeying His Word than whether it can trace a line of succession back to Jesus’ apostles. Jesus was very concerned about abandoning the Word of God to follow the traditions of men (Mark 7:7). Traditions are not inherently invalid…there are some good and valuable traditions. Again, the issue must be whether a doctrine, practice, or tradition is Biblical. How then does the Roman Catholic Church compare with the teachings of the Word of God?

Salvation: The Roman Catholic Church teaches that salvation is by baptismal regeneration and is maintained through the Catholic sacraments unless a willful act of sin is committed that breaks the state of sanctifying grace. The Bible teaches that we are saved by grace which is received through simple faith (Ephesians 2:8-9), and that good works are the result of a change of the heart wrought in salvation (Ephesians 2:10; 2 Corinthians 5:17) and the fruit of that new life in Christ (John 15).

Assurance of salvation: The Roman Catholic Church teaches that salvation cannot be guaranteed or assured. 1 John 5:13 states that the letter of 1 John was written for the purpose of assuring believers of the CERTAINTY of their salvation.

Good Works: The Roman Catholic Church states that Christians are saved by meritorious works (beginning with baptism) and that salvation is maintained by good works (receiving the sacraments, confession of sin to a priest, etc.) The Bible states that Christians are saved by grace through faith, totally apart from works (Titus 3:5; Ephesians 2:8-9; Galatians 3:10-11; Romans 3:19-24).

Baptism: In the New Testament baptism is ALWAYS practiced AFTER saving faith in Christ. Baptism is not the means of salvation; it is faith in the Gospel that saves (1 Corinthians 1:14-18; Romans 10:13-17). The Roman Catholic Church teaches baptismal regeneration of infants, a practice never found in Scripture. The only possible hint of infant baptism in the Bible that the Roman Catholic Church can point to is that the whole household of the Philippian jailer was baptized in Acts 16:33. However, the context nowhere mentions infants. Acts 16:31 declares that salvation is by faith. Paul spoke to all of the household in verse 32, and the whole household believed (verse 34). This passage only supports the baptism of those who have already believed, not of infants.

Prayer: The Roman Catholic Church teaches Catholics to not only pray to God, but also to petition Mary and the saints for their prayers. Contrary to this, we are taught in Scripture to only pray to God (Matthew 6:9; Luke 18:1-7).

Priesthood: The Roman Catholic Church teaches that there is a distinction between the clergy and the “lay people,” whereas the New Testament teaches the priesthood of all believers (1 Peter 2:9).

Sacraments: The Roman Catholic Church teaches that a believer is infused with grace upon reception of the sacraments. Such teaching is nowhere found in Scripture.

Confession: The Roman Catholic Church teaches that unless a believer is hindered, the only way to receive the forgiveness of sins is by confessing them to a priest. Contrary to this, Scripture teaches that confession of sins is to be made to God (1 John 1:9).

Mary: The Roman Catholic Church teaches, among other things, that Mary is the Queen of Heaven, a perpetual virgin, and the co-redemptress who ascended into heaven. In Scripture, she is portrayed as an obedient, believing servant of God, who became the mother of Jesus. None of the other attributes mentioned by the Roman Catholic Church have any basis in the Bible. The idea of Mary being the co-redemptress and another mediator between God and man is not only extra-biblical (found only outside of Scripture), but is also unbiblical (contrary to Scripture). Acts 4:12 declares that Jesus is the only redeemer. 1 Timothy 2:5 proclaims that Jesus is the only mediator between God and men.

Many other examples could be given. These issues alone clearly identify the Catholic Church as being unbiblical. Every Christian denomination has traditions and practices that are not explicitly based on Scripture. That is why Scripture must be the standard of Christian faith and practice. The Word of God is always true and reliable. The same cannot be said of church tradition. Our guideline is to be: “What does Scripture say?” (Romans 4:3; Galatians 4:30; Acts 17:11). 2 Timothy 3:16-17 declares, “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.”

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
matthew 5:17

19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. matthew 5:19

“And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth it not in him. But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him. “
1 John 2:3-5

“For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.”
Romans 2:13

“Do we make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.”
Romans 3:31

 

[Elvisman]

Oh really? Well lets see. We have this....

Leviticus 11 KJV - And the LORD spake unto Moses and to - Bible Gateway

And then we have this...Acts 11 KJV - And the apostles and brethren that were - Bible Gateway

So God made clean what once was an abomination. BTW, I am not the one who said we are not bound by OT law. That is what Paul said. If you do not want to believe the Bible that is fine with me. It is truly amazing how you limit God to only what the Catholic church says about Him. It is quite apparent you do not have a high opinion about God or Jesus, but rather only about the RCC. You are the one that will have a problem with Him, not me.

Again, the trinity is the Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost. It is not the Father, Son, and the RCC. If you want to worship and put your faith in the RCC then you go right ahead and do that. I will stick with Jesus. And just for your reading pleasure......

Are Catholic beliefs and practices biblical?

Question: "Are Catholic beliefs and practices biblical?"

Assurance of salvation: The Roman Catholic Church teaches that salvation cannot be guaranteed or assured. 1 John 5:13 states that the letter of 1 John was written for the purpose of assuring believers of the CERTAINTY of their salvation.

Good Works: The Roman Catholic Church states that Christians are saved by meritorious works (beginning with baptism) and that salvation is maintained by good works (receiving the sacraments, confession of sin to a priest, etc.) The Bible states that Christians are saved by grace through faith, totally apart from works (Titus 3:5; Ephesians 2:8-9; Galatians 3:10-11; Romans 3:19-24).

Baptism: In the New Testament baptism is ALWAYS practiced AFTER saving faith in Christ. Baptism is not the means of salvation; it is faith in the Gospel that saves (1 Corinthians 1:14-18; Romans 10:13-17). The Roman Catholic Church teaches baptismal regeneration of infants, a practice never found in Scripture. The only possible hint of infant baptism in the Bible that the Roman Catholic Church can point to is that the whole household of the Philippian jailer was baptized in Acts 16:33. However, the context nowhere mentions infants. Acts 16:31 declares that salvation is by faith. Paul spoke to all of the household in verse 32, and the whole household believed (verse 34). This passage only supports the baptism of those who have already believed, not of infants.

Prayer: The Roman Catholic Church teaches Catholics to not only pray to God, but also to petition Mary and the saints for their prayers. Contrary to this, we are taught in Scripture to only pray to God (Matthew 6:9; Luke 18:1-7).

Many other examples could be given. These issues alone clearly identify the Catholic Church as being unbiblical. Every Christian denomination has traditions and practices that are not explicitly based on Scripture. That is why Scripture must be the standard of Christian faith and practice. The Word of God is always true and reliable. The same cannot be said of church tradition. Our guideline is to be: “What does Scripture say?” (Romans 4:3; Galatians 4:30; Acts 17:11). 2 Timothy 3:16-17 declares, “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.”

The Scriptural "examples" of what was once an abomination to eat is for HUMAN BEINGS - not God. What is an abomination to God is ALWAYS an abomination to Him. Can you show me a similar passage about God recinding the lawa against homosexual sex?
Yeah - I didn't think so.

As for your statements regarding the "traditions of men" practiced by the Church that Jesus condemned - you have a LOT to learn.

First of all - Jesus said that the Pharisees were placing their traditions above the word of God (Matt. 15:9, Mark 7:5-9). Jesus was speaking of the Pharisees and scribes who were living hypocritical lives and placing their traditions above the word of God and the spirit of the Law.

The Catholic Church does not now nor has it ever taught one, single tradition that was contrary to Scripture - your personal ignorance notwithstanding.

All of the information you posted above to the contrary shows a complete failure to exegete the Scriptures properly. I will address the issue of the assurance of Salvation on this post and the others in subsequent posts.

The Bible is ADAMANT about the fact that you can LOSE your salvation by falling back into sin. Here are a few passages for you to chew on:

Romans 11:22
“See, then, the kindness and severity of God: severity toward those who fell, but God's kindness to you, provided you remain in his kindness; otherwise you to will be cut off.”

Hebrews 10:26-27
“If we sin deliberately after receiving knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains sacrifice for sins but a fearful prospect of judgment and a flaming fire that is going to consume the adversaries.”

2 Peter 2:20-22
For if they, having escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge of (our) Lord and savior Jesus Christ, again become entangled and overcome by them, their last condition is worse than their first.
For it would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandment handed down to them.

Matt. 7:21
Not everyone who says to me, "Lord, Lord" shall enter the kingdom of heaven’."

1 Cor. 9:27
"I pummel my body and subdue it, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified."

1 Cor. 4:4
"I am not aware of anything against myself, but I am not thereby justified. It is the Lord who judges me."

Matt. 24:13; cf. 25:31–46
"He who endures to the end will be saved"

2 Peter 3:17
Therefore, dear friends, since you already know this, be on your guard so that you may not be carried away by the error of lawless men and fall from your secure position.

Revelation 3:5
He who overcomes will, like them, be dressed in white. I will never blot out his name from the book of life, but will acknowledge his name before my Father and his angels.

Revelation 22:19
And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.

I would say, "Nice try", but it wasn't . . .

 

[Elvisman]

Oh really? Well lets see. We have this....
Good Works: The Roman Catholic Church states that Christians are saved by meritorious works (beginning with baptism) and that salvation is maintained by good works (receiving the sacraments, confession of sin to a priest, etc.) The Bible states that Christians are saved by grace through faith, totally apart from works (Titus 3:5; Ephesians 2:8-9; Galatians 3:10-11; Romans 3:19-24).

WRONG.
This is a complete LIE. The Church does NOT teach this falsehood.

The Church teaches that we are saved by the grace of God ALONE.
We are saved by grace through faith working in love.

Get your facts straight, my anti-Catholic friend.

 

[Elvisman]

Prayer: The Roman Catholic Church teaches Catholics to not only pray to God, but also to petition Mary and the saints for their prayers. Contrary to this, we are taught in Scripture to only pray to God (Matthew 6:9; Luke 18:1-7).

NOWHERE in either of these passages does it say that prayer is for God alone.
This falsehood is based on your ignorance of the word, "Pray".

We are ALL called upon to intercede for one another with prayer and supplications – 2 Cor. 1:10-11, Eph. 6:18-20, 1Tim. 2:1-4, James 5:16.
Anti-Catholics like you often say that to “pray” to somebody in heaven to ask them to for pray for us is idolatry because prayer is reserved for God alone. This is a complete failure to understand the word. To pray, in the most rudimentary definition of the word, is to petition – to ask something of someone.
Look it up.

We pray to each other daily. Whereas prayers of adoration, worship, confession are reserved for God alone, asking a saint in Heaven to pray for us is no different than asking a saint on earth to do the same. To deny this is to deny the reality that is the body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:12-31). We are all parts of the Body of Christ and are more radically joined together than the finger is to the hand because we are joined in Christ – and not by mere flesh.

Heb. 12:1 tells us that “we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses” and that we are to live accordingly. A witness is somebody who sees and hears things (Acts 1:8, 2:32) – otherwise they are
not witnesses.

Revelation 5:8 shows the Elders in heaven bringing our prayers before God and Rev. 8:3-4 speaks of the Angels in heaven doing the same thing.

Your problem is that you deny that the Body of Christ include those who are in heaven. The Bible says you're wrong.

Get your story straight.

 

[Elvisman]

Priesthood: The Roman Catholic Church teaches that there is a distinction between the clergy and the “lay people,” whereas the New Testament teaches the priesthood of all believers (1 Peter 2:9).

Again - your ignorance knows no bounds.

In the Old Testament, there were three levels of Priests: Aaron, the High Priest, the Levitical Priesthood, and the rest of the people were a general priesthood of believers.
In the New Testament, there are also three levels of Priests: Jesus, our High Priest (1 Tim. 2:5, Heb. 7:22-25), the Ministerial (Levitical) Priests (James 5:14-15) and the general priesthood of all Christians (1 Peter 2:5-9).

Just as with all New Testament fulfillments, the fulfillment is always more glorious than the Old Testament type.

Finally, in the Epistle of Jude, we read the warning about those who would usurp Church Authority by assuming the ministerial priesthood without the Church’s consent (Jude 1:11). In this passage he compares them to the rebellion of Korah and their subsequent punishment (Numbers 16:1-35; 31:16).

Get your facts straight before responding.[/font]

 

[Elvisman]

Confession: The Roman Catholic Church teaches that unless a believer is hindered, the only way to receive the forgiveness of sins is by confessing them to a priest. Contrary to this, Scripture teaches that confession of sins is to be made to God (1 John 1:9).

WRONG again.

The practice of telling our sins directly to a priest is based directly in Scripture. Three times in the Gospels (Matt. 16:19, 18:18 and John 20:23), we read where Jesus gave the Apostles the power to forgive sins or to hold them bound. This is not a something that Jesus took lightly. In John 20:21-23, Jesus (who is God) breathes on the Apostles as he is giving them this power:
(Jesus) said to them again, "Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, so I send you."
And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the holy Spirit. Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained."

The fact that Jesus breathed on the Apostles when entrusted them with this ministry is highly significant because he doesn’t do this anywhere else in the New Testament. In fact, there are only two times in ALL of Scripture where God breathes on man:
The first is when he breathed life into Adam.
The second is here in John’s Gospel when he is giving them the power to forgive or retain sins.

Anti-Catholics are fond of saying that Jesus was merely telling them that they now had the power to recognize sins – but that is NOT what he said (Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained). The Greek word used here for the word “forgive” is aphiemi, which means: to send away, to send forth, yield up, to expire, to let go, give up a debt, forgive, to remit.

The practice of confessing your sins to the Church is an ancient one that goes all the way back to the Apostles themselves. We see this in the 1st century document, the Didache (The Teachings of the Twelve Apostles), where it emphatically states the necessity of confessing our sins to the Church:
“Confess your sins in Church, and do not go up to your prayer with an evil conscience. This is the way of life. . . , On the Lord's Day gather together, break bread, and give thanks, after confessing your transgressions so that your sacrifice may be pure” (Didache 4:14,14:1 [A.D.70]).

St. Paul makes no small case for this ministry of reconciliation clearly in 2 Cor. 5:18-20:
“And all this is from God, who has reconciled us to himself through Christ and given us the ministry of reconciliation, namely, God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting their trespasses against them and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation. So we are ambassadors for Christ, as if God were appealing through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.”

In 2 Cor. 2:10, he states, “Whomever you forgive anything, so do I. For indeed what I have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, has been for you in the presence of Christ”

Do your homework next time.