Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
That's a very interesting argument. It seems I must research the validity of the Catholic Church's claim to teach with Jesus' authority. Simply because Jesus tells Peter that His Church will be built upon him doesn't mean that to follow the Church is to follow Jesus ...Dear AetheriusLamia,
That is not what the Catholic Church holds, or what the Catholic Catechism teaches. If one is to be a faithful Catholic (or Copt) then one accepts that Scripture is to be read within the tradition of, and by the light of, the Church that produced it. The Church is Spirit-filled in its pronouncements, not merely human, and for us to put our private judgement against that is an act of disobedience to our Father.
Like all children we can be disobedient and claim we know best; but that is not I think what either of our Churches teach.
Of course we are free to suggest that there might be other ways of approaching this, but we would need to do so by a way other than our private reading of the Scriptures. By what authority do we teach? The Church teaches by His authority.
In peace,
Anglian
The point I've tried to make is that it isn't. (And, again, this thread is about discussing marriage, not homosexuality.)The point I was trying to make, and that I think you missed is that homosexuality is plainly spelled out in scripture as a sinful act. Yes, even in the NT.
What you've quoted is not clear at all. Nowhere in that passage is homosexuality mentioned as the sinful action. "Unnatural, unseemly, shameful actions" can be anything for the women, and for the men, it is simply something shameful involving each other. You are assuming it is homosexuality in general, something not stated by the text. And I cannot be any clearer than that.Rom 1:26-27 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
It doesn't get much more clear than that, unless you can somehow justify a 'vile affectation' as a good thing.
I must say that you have no proof. If you wish to debate this point, please go to http://www.gaiaonline.com/forum/mor...-marriage-you-are-a-bad-christian/t.18457471/ ... they will be far happier than I would be to prove you wrong.Homosexuality is a sin because it is an abomination to God not for health reasons.
I concur fully.Because some are trying to make scripture say what they want it to say, rather then just listening to what it does say.
As I said someone can try and argue the sky isn't actually blue because they don't think it is. But in the end of the day, it's still blue because the facts say it is.
They go hand in hand. Homosexuality isn't simply about sex. It defines the nature of the relationship as those being of the same gender. Homosexuality is sinful, reguardless of if the people participate in sex.The point I've tried to make is that it isn't. (And, again, this thread is about discussing marriage, not homosexuality.)
It speaks of men leaving the natural use of women to lust for one another. That is clearly homosexuality. It also clearly defines that orintation towards women is natural, not men.What you've quoted is not clear at all. Nowhere in that passage is homosexuality mentioned. "Unnatural actions" can be anything for the women, and for the men, it is simply something shameful. You are assuming it is homosexuality, something not stated by the text. And I cannot be any clearer than that.
The point I've tried to make is that it isn't. (And, again, this thread is about discussing marriage, not homosexuality.)
What you've quoted is not clear at all. Nowhere in that passage is homosexuality mentioned as the sinful action. "Unnatural, unseemly, shameful actions" can be anything for the women, and for the men, it is simply something shameful involving each other. You are assuming it is homosexuality in general, something not stated by the text. And I cannot be any clearer than that.
Then why is it? Because He says so? Why is it wrong for two of the same sex to love eachother and ultimately, get married?Dark,
It has nothing to do with context. Homosexuality is a sin because it is an abomination to God not for health reasons.
What other definition do you want?I am almost ready to abandon this thread, as I appear to be wasting my time here. I come to discuss what marriage is, and why we think marriage is that, and so far I have received only ONE reply: Marriage is between heterosexuals because the Church says so, as I initially thought.
Umm, I think you will find that there are a lot of conservatives who would support a legal union between homosexuals. I personally find something along those lines to be agreeable as I think that they should be subject to the same protections under the law, and same tax penalties as those that are married have. However, what you see as conservatives trying to force our definition of marriage down everyone else's throats, I see as Christians clearly defending the institution of marriage that has been under attack in this country since the 60's. The fact that marriage and the family unit has been weakened by the secular progressive agenda in this country is not debatable. It is fact.Also, what of legal marriage? Shouldn't they be considered separate things, since the Christian marriage is the union of two people under God, while the legal marriage is the union of two people under no God? Instead we see conservatives attempting to force their religious definition of marriage upon a secular society, and discriminate against homosexuals who don't believe in any sort of God (and are not trying to obtain a Christian marriage), etc ...
Sure I do, the bible. The passages have already been posted.I must say that you have no proof
You asked why it precludes homosexuality and that is being debated. Your question is being answered just not as you would like it to be. And it is not because the church says so, it is because the bible says so. When people start posting papal bulls and such I will be right there with you saying look to the bible, not the Pope.I come to discuss what marriage is, and why we think marriage is that, and so far I have received only ONE reply: Marriage is between heterosexuals because the Church says so, as I initially thought.
It is a covenant and union between man and woman joined in Gods eyes.To steer the conversation slightly away from dissolving into a "homosexuality is wrong" argument, going back to the original "what is marriage" bit
When they exchange vows and enter into a union in Gods eyes. It has nothing to do with paper except for secular purposes.And when are two people married? When they exchange rings? When they sign the papers? When the priest/whoever says so? When they have sex? Is it the church service, or is that just public declaration and ritual/tradition?
Yes, they are still married in Gods eyes. God permits divorce in cases of adultury. I would presume also that if one abuses the other divorce would be ok. And no, casual sex does not make two people married and is sinful in its own way. These things are seperate debates however.And if two people get "married" in church in accordance with today's generally accepted view, yet are not in a proper loving relationship with God and each other, are they still married in God's eyes? Is it a true marriage? If people have casual sex, does that mean they are then married?
Because it is an abomination to God. Thats al lthe reason that is needed.Then why is it? Because He says so? Why is it wrong for two of the same sex to love eachother and ultimately, get married?
As far as I understand it, the Bible does not define marriage. Rather, it seems the Roman Catholic Church and Eastern Orthodox Church decided what marriage should be, and then the powerful groups of Protestants, when they broke off, found no problem with their ideas.
So now, reading the Bible with an open mind, temporarily suspending what I have been told to think while so doing, I have not found sufficient discourse in the Bible about marriage that justify barring it from homosexuals, especially as it is the only venue for releasing sexual tension, as Paul recommends for those who cannot remain abstinent.
In fact, I only recall reading two passages specifically about marriage. The first appears at Genesis 2.22-24. But that is not a definition of marriage, it is merely an explanation for heterosexuals forming unions with each other, as well as evidence that God designed men and women to go together. It is not evidence that men can't also go with men: absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Jesus later references this passage in Matthew and Mark, but Jesus speaks about heterosexuals who wish to divorce. Nothing is stated about the nature of marriage by Jesus other than its permanency, that the two are bound as one flesh, and that humans are not to interfere with the union God made.
Then, from where does the idea arise that homosexuals may not marry? No where in the Bible is emphasis placed upon the body, other than the old Sinai Covenant, where God makes it clear that men are not to enjoy sex so much (by ordering their foreskin removed -- alas!); to the contrary, the New Testament is about focusing on your spiritual affairs, and admonishes against wrapping yourself in earthly affairs, such as, for example, caring about the location of reproductive organs.
And actually, it seems to me that the Bible supports the idea of not placing too much emphasis upon your earthly body or earthly marriage. See Matthew 22.23-30, where the Sadducees question Jesus about the Resurrection, involving Levirate Marriage. Also, Paul says there is no male or female in Heaven (Galatians 3.26-28).
Please explain to me what I am missing about marriage. Why does it matter what I have between my legs? The Roman Catholic Church says intercourse is sinful if it is not penal-vaginal; they appear to me to have an unhealthy fixation on the idea. Many do not want children, and many wish to adopt (including homosexuals), yet the Roman Catholic Church acts as if gays are incapable of raising adopted children, simply because they cannot birth them.
In short, the Roman Catholic Church cites as one of its only reasons for prohibiting gays from marriage that gays cannot birth children. They are, in short, claiming that God cannot or will not bless them, which is blasphemous. It is also poor logic, as the same precludes those born with birth defects (and what of hermaphrodites?), those who have suffered testicular or ovarian cancer, those sterile, etc.
Please help me understand marriage, because it appears that, after reading everything the Bible has to offer, I don't understand what the majority of Christians (or at least the loudest) seem to believe.
I have been considering this topic for about two years, and after much prayer and consideration, I feel that God doesn't care what your sex is, nor does God have a problem with gays.
To be clear, this thread is not about homosexuality, it is about marriage. So please, do not move it to the Debates on Homosexuality board, because it does not belong there.
You're right. Can't argue with that! -_-'Because it is an abomination to God. Thats al lthe reason that is needed.
Lev. 20:13, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them"That is not a valid reason, because it is not clear that the Bible condemns homosexuality. That is a huge controversy in and of itself.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?