Pope: Saving world from homosexuality like saving rainforests

[angellica]

"That part of the Bible"? Are there parts of the Bible you do reject?

No.

 

[ChaliceThunder]

Then what is the context?

The context is speaking to pagan temple prostitution.
It's an admonition to straight people who took part in the rituals (which involved same-sex prostitutes) of the time.



But you should already know this.

 

[WatersMoon110]

Ahh, the familiar shellfish talking point. That was for tribes in the OT regarding ceremonial laws and tribal laws, not so with homosexuality.

Familiar to you now maybe.

Homosexuality (or at least, men "laying" with men) was condemned in Leviticus as well. Jesus did not speak a word, that we know of, against homosexuality.

Paul is not Jesus. Paul was not the Son of God. And you don't seem to care about the historical context of Paul's letter to the Romans, which I feel condemns only Christians participating in Roman Sex Rites, and not homosexuality in general.

 

[ChaliceThunder]

No.

I think that's wrong.

I think you reject "Love your neighbor as yourself"
and "Love one another as I have loved you."

Yep - I think those are things from the bible you DO reject.

 

[ChaliceThunder]

Ahh, the familiar shellfish talking point. That was for tribes in the OT regarding ceremonial laws and tribal laws, not so with homosexuality.

ANd how do you know this?

 

[angellica]

The context is speaking to pagan temple prostitution.
It's an admonition to straight people who took part in the rituals (which involved same-sex prostitutes) of the time.



But you should already know this.

Those rituals of same-sex sex are wrong. They turned from God to ungodly, sinful acts, like same-sex sex. I fail to see how this changes the message that homosexual sex is wrong.

 

[angellica]

I think that's wrong.

I think you reject "Love your neighbor as yourself"
and "Love one another as I have loved you."

Yep - I think those are things from the bible you DO reject.

Loving someone as yourself does not mean abandoning your beliefs to appease that person, nor does it mean walking on eggshells so as to avoid hurting their feelings or causing controversy.

 

[angellica]

Familiar to you now maybe.

Homosexuality (or at least, men "laying" with men) was condemned in Leviticus as well. Jesus did not speak a word, that we know of, against homosexuality.

Paul is not Jesus. Paul was not the Son of God. And you don't seem to care about the historical context of Paul's letter to the Romans, which I feel condemns only Christians participating in Roman Sex Rites, and not homosexuality in general.

Because those sex rites were homosexual sex, which is against what God tells us! He tells us sex is between a married man and woman only.

 

[angellica]

ANd how do you know this?

Reading the Bible and just from various sources/books over years and years.

 

[ChaliceThunder]

Those rituals of same-sex sex are wrong. They turned from God to ungodly, sinful acts, like same-sex sex. I fail to see how this changes the message that homosexual sex is wrong.

The message was not so much about homosexual sex as about worshiping something other that the Living God. The bible does NOT condemn the orientation, nor does it condemn the wholesome, healthy relationships between members of the same sex that reflect God's glory and love for humanity.

 

[morningstar2651]

Not according to the Bible.

What about King Solomon?

 

[ChaliceThunder]

Loving someone as yourself does not mean abandoning your beliefs to appease that person, nor does it mean walking on eggshells so as to avoid hurting their feelings or causing controversy.

I dunno - it's pretty cut and dried to me.

 

[angellica]

The message was not so much about homosexual sex as about worshiping something other that the Living God. The bible does NOT condemn the orientation, nor does it condemn the wholesome, healthy relationships between members of the same sex that reflect God's glory and love for humanity.

Then why does He not once mention it? Why doesn't He give guidelines for gay marriages as well as straight marriages? Why does He only ever refer to marriage as a man and woman when giving guidelines on how marriage should be?

 

[ChaliceThunder]

Reading the Bible and just from various sources/books over years and years.

Well I know the direct opposite from reading the bible and other various sources/books. over years and years - more than you.

 

[angellica]

The message was not so much about homosexual sex as about worshiping something other that the Living God. The bible does NOT condemn the orientation, nor does it condemn the wholesome, healthy relationships between members of the same sex that reflect God's glory and love for humanity.

It said it was unnatural and a perversion. I don't see how you get healthy and wholesome from that.

 

[WatersMoon110]

Because those sex rites were homosexual sex, which is against what God tells us! He tells us sex is between a married man and woman only.

It doesn't say "only" it just says between a man and a woman.

But it Paul doesn't say that homosexual sex is a sin when it isn't done by a Christian participating in a Roman Sex Rite. That is your interpretation of that section, but it is not necessarily the only interpretation.

 

[angellica]

Well I know the direct opposite from reading the bible and other various sources/books. over years and years - more than you.

Well I guess if you say you know more than me then it must be true -_-.

 

[WatersMoon110]

Then why does He not once mention it? Why doesn't He give guidelines for gay marriages as well as straight marriages? Why does He only ever refer to marriage as a man and woman when giving guidelines on how marriage should be?

Because the audience He was speaking to were mainly Jewish, and they did not have such things.

 

[angellica]

It doesn't say "only" it just says between a man and a woman.

But it Paul doesn't say that homosexual sex is a sin when it isn't done by a Christian participating in a Roman Sex Rite. That is your interpretation of that section, but it is not necessarily the only interpretation.

It never says it is okay, ever. It never mentions men getting married, or supports gays getting married, or offers them guidelines or anything. If it was okay, there would be something there besides condemnation of homosexuality.

 

[ChaliceThunder]

Then why does He not once mention it? Why doesn't He give guidelines for gay marriages as well as straight marriages? Why does He only ever refer to marriage as a man and woman when giving guidelines on how marriage should be?

I am guessing that maybe most of us get it fine without him mentioning it the way you want him to.

But you read scripture with blinders on - so I should not be so harsh on you.

Try removing the blinders of literalism and your own prejudice.
You might find Jesus even more wonderful that you find him now.

Blessed Christmas!