so what's with this notion part ll

[FranciscanSpirit]

What does Paul mean by 'nor the effeminate' will go to Heaven.,,?

.

You know, you say you're Catholic, so maybe you should start using the translation of Scripture the Church went to so much trouble to provide for you so you stop misinterpreting. Here's the quote from 1 Cor 6:9

Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes* nor sodomites...

Now, just so you understand the problem with the translation, there was no word in Greek for "homosexual." Here's the note:

* [6:9] The Greek word translated as boy prostitutes may refer to catamites, i.e., boys or young men who were kept for purposes of prostitution, a practice not uncommon in the Greco-Roman world. In Greek mythology this was the function of Ganymede, the “cupbearer of the gods,” whose Latin name was Catamitus. The term translated sodomites refers to adult males who indulged in homosexual practices with such boys. See similar condemnations of such practices in Rom 1:26–27; 1 Tm 1:10.

When Jesus healed the Roman officer's "servant" He was healing his catamite. Officers were assigned these young men to accompany them in the field when away from their families. The catamites were responsible for the horses and equipment and cooked and so forth and were available for sex so the officer didn't use local women.

I'm done here anyway, I've been having this same conversation with people like you on forums for almost twenty years. You believe what you wish, just in charity, try to not spread your bigotry around, for the sake of your soul.

BTW, every single reference to same sex behavior is Scripture, OT and NT, is a reference to prostitution or cultlike practices. What we are speaking about here: gay people in stable loving unions, is never addressed in Scripture.

 

[benedictaoo]

Being gay is not a sin. Your position is that gay folks should somehow stop being gay. It's not enough for you that they practice chastity, they have to be neuter. Somehow.

Or have you decided differently?

There is seriously a bigotry here that is very apparent and evident and sometimes we need to be knocked off our high horse to see ourselves as other sees us.

Don't be so freaked out by homosexuals... one might save your life one day. Just sayin'.

 

[benedictaoo]

Jesus said 'IF you even look at a woman with lust you have committed adultery'....

AND HE said 'Pluck out your eyes if it causes you to sin for it is better to go to Heaven with no eyes than have eyes and go to hell.'

THAT is a serious implication that our lusts which are caused from seeing someone - will lead us to hell.
IF you dont know this basic teaching from Jesus - then perhaps read scriptures again.

If nothing else - Jesus was forth right and less inclined to say 'Its ok, keep sinning'

NO< Jesus is MERCY IF and contingent upon IF our hearts are contrite for our sins and we avoid the sins.
'Go and sin no more' means 'DO not sin anymore'.
SO if someone is attracted to SS it is best to find ways to avoid the thoughts for two reasons
A) It causes lusts to concentrate on it
B) You are not contrite if you are still enjoying the fantasies.

Let's stop pretending mercy means we can sin and be in good standing.
ONE must take off the old man - the sins and attachments to the flesh - and put on the new man - the person who removes all attachments and thinks ONLY what pleases the Lord.

So if someone is putting on the new man or even plucking out there eyes - ie not looking at others - they are no longer SSA - they are Christian.

I dont know why you insist Christ had this wrong - or maybe you think His suggestion was harsh - but He never beat around the bush when it came to what does or does not cause us to go to Heaven or hell.

What does Paul mean by 'nor the effeminate' will go to Heaven.,,?

Let go of SSA and saying God doesnt understand them. He does better than we do and He says no - dont continue to sin, let it go....

No WA. YOU ARE WRONG. having a SSA is NOT a sin- the CCC says so, JPll said so.

and I don't play the self interpret the bible game from Protestants nor do I play that game with Catholics.

Where has the CHURCH said that gays and unmarried straight ppl must become A sexual in order to make it to heaven?

They are never going to get rid of an attraction to the same sex. They can, however, control it and not act on it. Like many priests I'm sure does.

but to say Jesus said they have to stop having this attraction... no, he never said that.

Its our actions and choices that lead us to sin that has a potential to send us to hell because we would choose to go there.

God does NOT punish us with hell because we are bad... we choose to go there because we choose sin over Him, because we do not want Him but sin.

that is what we need to teach homosexuals. we do not need to teach them to stop being attracted to men because God's gonna burn you in hell.

Get your message straight WA, because you aren't going to be effective until you do.

My goodness... can you bring yourself to say, God loves homosexuals? can you bring yourself to say, God loves Barrack Obama?

I sense much contempt in you towards certain people. Its not correct for a Christian of any kind to judge sinners and have contempt for them because of their sin.

The harden sinner who ends up rejecting God and choosing hell- God loves them, he just doesn't love the evil that was brought to their soul.

and a person with a SSA does nothing wrong by having one because he can not help it no more then you can help being attracted to men. But what you can help is not acting on every whim that comes along and so can gay ppl.

as long as they control themselves and not give into temptation... they are fine being a homosexual.

 

[benedictaoo]

Not sure what your point was, as I was not the one promoting desexualization, only pointing out the problems with it.

I don't know what's this to do with anything either, but Imma go on record here saying that IMO, desexualizing yourself is not healthy. Not for married, not for singles, not for homosexuals... a married couple can be celibate and still hang on to sexuality, attractions.

The fact here remains, we just do not know what makes a person homosexual. The most the Church has said is those do have a SSA is not sinning. having a SSA is not in of itself a sin. having sex with a person of the same sex, is.

 

[isshinwhat]

What does Paul mean by 'nor the effeminate' will go to Heaven.,,?

.
You know, you say you're Catholic, so maybe you should start using the translation of Scripture the Church went to so much trouble to provide for you so you stop misinterpreting. Here's the quote from 1 Cor 6:9

That is from the Douay-Rheims, which is a translation of the Latin Vulgate (the official Bible of the Church), which uses the word "molles," literally translated as "soft and effeminate." if you do not like the translation, that is one thing, but it is not like WA picked some random rare Bible translation that fit her POV.

 

[isshinwhat]

Being born attracted to the same sex as you is not a "sin inclination". Its who they are.

Disordered? yeah, but they are BORN this way and can not HELP being this way.

We are ALL born with an inclination towards sin, that is what concupicense is. It is nothing to be ashamed of, it is common to us all. Man was created with passions ordered toward ends which were Godly. Sin brought disorder and a reorientation away from God, so our disordered passions incline us toward sin. Put simply, all of our disordered passions incline us toward sin, though the inclinations themselves are not sinful.

 

[isshinwhat]

Now, for your comfort, you want them to all pretend they aren't what they are and aren't suffering at all? That's what I hear you saying.

What I am saying is this, I refuse to identify someone based upon a disordered passion; period. If that passion happens to be same sex attraction, I am not suggesting they pretend it does not exist, that would be foolish and could easily lead one into an occasion to sin, nor do I judge because of the burden they bear. It is my job as a Christian to love my fellow man and give aid to each in bearing his cross with Christ, not trip them up. We tell people all the time, "look you screwed up and will be tempted to screw up again, but don't focus on that, don't let it define you, and move on." We don't say to some guy who used to sleep around, "look, you're a fornicator, it's who you are, it's an inclination you were born with that lots of people have. You don't have to fornicate, because that is wrong, but you are still a fornicator and it's good you identify as such and embrace it while you try to avoid acting on it." I think it does people a terrible disservice. We are human beings, fallen, prone to and inclined toward sin, but not defined by it.

 

[WarriorAngel]

What I am saying is this, I refuse to identify someone based upon a disordered passion; period. If that passion happens to be same sex attraction, I am not suggesting they pretend it does not exist, that would be foolish and could easily lead one into an occasion to sin, nor do I judge because of the burden they bear. It is my job as a Christian to love my fellow man and give aid to each in bearing his cross with Christ, not trip them up. We tell people all the time, "look you screwed up and will be tempted to screw up again, but don't focus on that, don't let it define you, and move on."

We don't say to some guy who used to sleep around, "look, you're a fornicator, it's who you are, it's an inclination you were born with that lots of people have. You don't have to fornicate, because that is wrong, but you are still a fornicator and it's good you identify as such and embrace it while you try to avoid acting on it." I think it does people a terrible disservice. We are human beings, fallen, prone to and inclined toward sin, but not defined by it.

I also got a good giggle from how you put it, which is exactly what it seems like when i see the argument we ought to accept that they are this way and they ought to embrace it.

I am hearing over and over that they dont need to let it go - but everyone should accept it.

AND yet i dont see the same argument for other sins....

Its true - we dont tell ppl 'Look you are a fornicator, accept it and identify yuourself as one....'
or an adulterer for that matter.

I wonder if Bene's husband was an adulterer and slept with women behind her back if she would give him the same speech.
Why wouldnt she?
I mean a sin is a sin and we cannot change who we are....right?

The argument is excusing the sinner to keep going on the same track without letting it go and moving on as Christ would want us.

The Our Father says as it is in Heaven.
Christ said therte is no marrying or giving in marriage in heaven - ie we will not be sexual creatures.

Bringing up a married person - and saying as i was told it is easy for me to say because i am married - well marriage isnt easy - and secondly i bear other crosses. And thirdly - i took on marriage because it is God ordained to do so.

I would have preferred to fornicate and leave when i grew tired of him. BUT i am stuck for life with him... and if someone thinks thats easy - they have no idea. Its not even about sex...there comea a point fo being so over it. Then the hard work comes in...chosing to love - chosing to work on it.

Its not all about whoopie i can have sex..... thats the last thing on the list after you have to work work work on constantly getting it right in the marriage.
There are a few lucky docks who do it in sync every time. Then there are those who bear crosses.

 

[benedictaoo]

That is from the Douay-Rheims, which is a translation of the Latin Vulgate (the official Bible of the Church), which uses the word "molles," literally translated as "soft and effeminate." if you do not like the translation, that is one thing, but it is not like WA picked some random rare Bible translation that fit her POV.

well... do u really think that soft and feminine men go to hell, Neil? since when thats a sin? The Church said being gay is not a sin- sexual relationship is. So are we having a contradiction here? or do we need to understand the context? not every gay man is soft and feminine either.

he is like Augustine, a lot of salt and really trying to figure out the proper context he said his stuff in.

 

[benedictaoo]

What I am saying is this, I refuse to identify someone based upon a disordered passion; period. If that passion happens to be same sex attraction, I am not suggesting they pretend it does not exist, that would be foolish and could easily lead one into an occasion to sin, nor do I judge because of the burden they bear. It is my job as a Christian to love my fellow man and give aid to each in bearing his cross with Christ, not trip them up. We tell people all the time, "look you screwed up and will be tempted to screw up again, but don't focus on that, don't let it define you, and move on." We don't say to some guy who used to sleep around, "look, you're a fornicator, it's who you are, it's an inclination you were born with that lots of people have. You don't have to fornicate, because that is wrong, but you are still a fornicator and it's good you identify as such and embrace it while you try to avoid acting on it." I think it does people a terrible disservice. We are human beings, fallen, prone to and inclined toward sin, but not defined by it.

so what do you identify them as? they aren't homosexual (even if that is what they are) what are they to you then? they're children of God, yes but we all are...

I don't see gay or straight, I see ppl who so happen to be either gay or straight. but when I see a gay person who isn't living the Christian lifestyle... I do not flip out on him anymore then I do when I see a straight person not living it either.

 

[isshinwhat]

well... do u really think that soft and feminine men go to hell, Neil? since when thats a sin? The Church said being gay is not a sin- sexual relationship is. So are we having a contradiction here? or do we need to understand the context? not every gay man is soft and feminine either.

he is like Augustine, a lot of salt and really trying to figure out the proper context he said his stuff in.

No, Michelle, I was just pointing out that WA, whether one agrees with her opinion or manner of putting it forth, was using a Catholic Bible contrary to FS's assertion. St. Paul was not limiting his words to boy prostitutes to the exclusion of general homosexuality.

 

[isshinwhat]

so what do you identify them as? they aren't homosexual (even if that is what they are) what are they to you then? they're children of God, yes but we all are...

Just as you said, as people, as children of God. If they are living an actively gay lifestyle then I have no problems in identifying them as gay. My contention comes in identification by inclination/temptation alone.

I don't see gay or straight, I see ppl who so happen to be either gay or straight. but when I see a gay person who isn't living the Christian lifestyle... I do not flip out on him anymore then I do when I see a straight person not living it either.

There is no reason to flip out on them, I agree. If there is a good time or place to bring up Church teaching I will do so, but for me, it has to come about naturally; it cannot be forced. I feel most of the time that does more harm than good. Same with my friends who sleep around, do drugs, use contraception, etc. I feel I can preach much more effectively by being a good Catholic husband, father, and officer than beating them over the head with a doctrine or dogma, even though I agree wholeheartedly with it. In the end, it is the Spirit that guides and corrects from within, I just try to do my best to lay a foundation and not destroy one. May God forgive me for those times I have fallen.

 

[WarriorAngel]

Effeminacy comes from the Latin, ex which is "out," and femina which means woman; it means "to be like a woman." The Latin term is mollities, meaning "softness."


In ancient Koine Greek, the word for effeminate is kinaidos (cinaedus in its Latinized form), or malakoi. A man "whose most salient feature was a supposedly "feminine" love of being sexually penetrated by other men." (Winkler, 1990).

 

[WarriorAngel]

so what do you identify them as? they aren't homosexual (even if that is what they are) what are they to you then? they're children of God, yes but we all are...

I don't see gay or straight, I see ppl who so happen to be either gay or straight. but when I see a gay person who isn't living the Christian lifestyle... I do not flip out on him anymore then I do when I see a straight person not living it either.

Assuming again?

Who flips out?

You may not flip out on ppl you meet in person - but it would be nice if you gave that same sort of charity everywhere and to everyone.

 

[benedictaoo]

No, Michelle, I was just pointing out that WA, whether one agrees with her opinion or manner of putting it forth, was using a Catholic Bible contrary to FS's assertion. St. Paul was not limiting his words to boy prostitutes to the exclusion of general homosexuality.

I didn't question her use of the bible, just how she jumps from a to z with her own interpretation.

 

[FranciscanSpirit]

No, Michelle, I was just pointing out that WA, whether one agrees with her opinion or manner of putting it forth, was using a Catholic Bible contrary to FS's assertion.

The only "Catholic" bibles are the ones the Church ordered produced and approved for our use. Those Bibles were done specifically to avoid this kind of misinterpretation of Scripture when people think they know what they are talking about by quoting an English word that doesn't mean what they think it does. This is why many many scholars and many many years were spent producing Scripture in various vernacular languages.

IF people want to claim some "Traditional Catholic" high ground, then submission to the will of the Church is one of the paramount elements of that, including using the version of Scripture approved for us. And I already knew from whence that quote came and I already know the arguments, specious though they may be, for using this revision of a translation of a translation.

St. Paul was not limiting his words to boy prostitutes to the exclusion of general homosexuality.

He said what he said. I think adding your own ideas is probably a good way to start your own personal religion. Paul was an exceptionally smart man, what we would call a "Canon lawyer," who wasn't scribbling a note, but writing a treatise. He wrote precisely and carefully and beautifully. He also wrote what he meant, not what you wish he meant.

 

[benedictaoo]

J


There is no reason to flip out on them, I agree. If there is a good time or place to bring up Church teaching I will do so, but for me, it has to come about naturally; it cannot be forced. I feel most of the time that does more harm than good. Same with my friends who sleep around, do drugs, use contraception, etc. I feel I can preach much more effectively by being a good Catholic husband, father, and officer than beating them over the head with a doctrine or dogma, even though I agree wholeheartedly with it. In the end, it is the Spirit that guides and corrects from within, I just try to do my best to lay a foundation and not destroy one. May God forgive me for those times I have fallen.

Exactly! exactly how I feel about the whole situation. I have to be around gays and lesbians often, daily almost and I have to also be around straight ppl who shack up and sin in all kinda of different ways. I also have to live with myself who also is a sinner...

I treat everybody the same and I can't preach at them like WA said they are only in my life so I can preach at them and said that I'm duty bound because if they go to hell, it would be partly my fault. I see them as ppl who have more to offer being in my life then for me to preach at them. Its like their dignity is reduced to being a gay we need to save.

that is what I mean by I'm not going to freak out because a gay man is in the room and I surly don't feel like I have to run to him and tell him to turn or burn.

If the situation presents itself, i will but it wouldn't be a "pray away the gay" type conversation.

 

[benedictaoo]

Assuming again?

Who flips out?

You may not flip out on ppl you meet in person - but it would be nice if you gave that same sort of charity everywhere and to everyone.

I'm sorry, were you saying something?

 

[benedictaoo]

He said what he said. I think adding your own ideas is probably a good way to start your own personal religion. Paul was an exceptionally smart man, what we would call a "Canon lawyer," who wasn't scribbling a note, but writing a treatise. He wrote precisely and carefully and beautifully. He also wrote what he meant, not what you wish he meant.

Its what the Protestants do...

 

[FranciscanSpirit]

Assuming again?{/qyuote]

See, you can be reading your own language and not understand what the person is saying: I do not flip out on him anymore then I do when I see a straight person not living it either.

Try it like this: "I don't flip out on him any more than I would ..." It's a forum, we have to read for context, people write how they talk most times.