Gay priests tie the civil knot

[newbie]

This is what Jesus had said of homosexuality.

"Because men do this, God had given them over to shameful passions. Even the women pervert the natural use of their sex by unnatural acts. In the same way the men give up natural sexual relations with women and burn with passion for each other. Men do shameful things with each other, and as a result they themselves are punished as they deserve for their wrongdoing."

Romans 1:26

Please don't put words in Jesus' mouth. He said nothing of the kind.

[newbie]

And here is what He had to say about temptation.

"If anyone should cause one of these little ones to turn away from his faith in me, it would be better for that man to have a large millstone tied round his neck and be thrown into the sea. So if your hand makes you turn away, cut it off! It is better for you to enter life without a hand than to keep both hands and go off to hell, to the fire that never goes out."

Mark 9:42

Interesting given that the Lord's prayer talks about "Lead us not into temptation." The prayer is to God, so who would be doing the leading?

[betsy]

He didn't say "he must be married." So it is a given that if he is indeed married, he must have only one wife.

No. He said he must have only one wife. Meaning he must not have more than one wife. A homosexual does not have more than one wife, he has zero wives, which is the same number of wives as an unmarried person.

Then why didn't He say "he must have only one spouse?"

[betsy]

This is what Jesus had said of homosexuality.

"Because men do this, God had given them over to shameful passions. Even the women pervert the natural use of their sex by unnatural acts. In the same way the men give up natural sexual relations with women and burn with passion for each other. Men do shameful things with each other, and as a result they themselves are punished as they deserve for their wrongdoing."

Romans 1:26

Did Jesus himself say this?

That's what it said in the bible.

[gc1765]

He didn't say "he must be married." So it is a given that if he is indeed married, he must have only one wife.

No. He said he must have only one wife. Meaning he must not have more than one wife. A homosexual does not have more than one wife, he has zero wives, which is the same number of wives as an unmarried person.

Then why didn't He say "he must have only one spouse?"

There's at least two possibilities:

1. It's ok for a man to have more than one husband

or more likely:

2. Being married to a woman is much more common than a man being married to a man. If a man tells you he's going to get married, dont' you automatically assume it's to a woman?

[betsy]

This is what Jesus had said of homosexuality.

"Because men do this, God had given them over to shameful passions. Even the women pervert the natural use of their sex by unnatural acts. In the same way the men give up natural sexual relations with women and burn with passion for each other. Men do shameful things with each other, and as a result they themselves are punished as they deserve for their wrongdoing."

Romans 1:26

Please don't put words in Jesus' mouth. He said nothing of the kind.

I only posted what was written in the bible, word for word.

[betsy]

He didn't say "he must be married." So it is a given that if he is indeed married, he must have only one wife.

No. He said he must have only one wife. Meaning he must not have more than one wife. A homosexual does not have more than one wife, he has zero wives, which is the same number of wives as an unmarried person.

Then why didn't He say "he must have only one spouse?"

There's at least two possibilities:

1. It's ok for a man to have more than one husband

or more likely:

Being married to a woman is much more common than a man being married to a man. If a man tells you he's going to get married, dont' you automatically assume it's to a woman?

Although it is written that homosexuality is considered an unnatural act by Jesus (which of course logically means He wouldn't validate it, much more endorse it)....assuming it was acceptable:

Why would He not use a word other than "wife" when He clearly gave His instructions as to the conduct of church elders? If He was clear and precise with His instructions, He would have been clear about this too.

[gc1765]

Although it is written that homosexuality is considered an unnatural act by Jesus (which of course logically means He wouldn't validate it, much more endorse it)....assuming it was acceptable:

You still haven't showed me where Jesus himself said that it was unnatural.

Why would He not use a word other than "wife" when He clearly gave His instructions as to the conduct of church elders? If He was clear and precise with His instructions, He would have been clear about this too.

I told you why, it was reason #2. Most, if not all, of the priests in that time would be married to women so it make sense to call them wives.

[betsy]

After 9/11 how many priests stood up and said "let's turn the other cheek" or "let's love our enemies"? None that I can think of. And why do these priests deserve more condemnation than someone like pat robertson who advocates murder, which definately goes against the bible?

How do you know what is being preached in each and every pulpit of every church? So how can you say that the priests had not called for calm and forgiveness? How do you know that the gospel of some mass was not about loving thine enemy?

From the Catholic Church, did the Pope not call for peace and restraint?

Did the Pope not forgive the man who tried to assassinate him? If I remember correctly, the pope even personally visited this man.

[betsy]

I told you why, it was reason #2. Most, if not all, of the priests in that time would be married to women so it make sense to call them wives.

But if He was giving a very clear list of do's and don'ts for His church elders...it would make more sense to have used the word "spouse." ESPECIALLY IF, according to you, most priest had been married to women.... then all the more He had reason to be very precise to include homosexual marriages!

If it was normally accepted (though not as rampant), I imagine one of the apostles would've raised his hand and asked, "But my Lord, what about the "others?"

But there is none! Nada!

[betsy]

You still haven't showed me where Jesus himself said that it was unnatural.

I have posted straight from the bible. As a Christian it is my belief that those were the words of Jesus.

Can you show me where Jesus Himself said that homosexuality is natural...and therefore should be accepted as such?

[betsy]

And here is what He had to say about temptation.

"If anyone should cause one of these little ones to turn away from his faith in me, it would be better for that man to have a large millstone tied round his neck and be thrown into the sea. So if your hand makes you turn away, cut it off! It is better for you to enter life without a hand than to keep both hands and go off to hell, to the fire that never goes out."

Mark 9:42

Interesting given that the Lord's prayer talks about "Lead us not into temptation." The prayer is to God, so who would be doing the leading?

Funny you should mention that. My husband and I were pondering about that very same thing not too long ago.

One of our guesses was that "lead us not into temptation"...means..."not to put us to the test."

I sometimes pray, adding "I'm afraid that I might fail."

[BubberMiley]

Can you show me where Jesus Himself said that homosexuality is natural...and therefore should be accepted as such?

Having loved his own who were in the world, he now showed them the full extent of his love. The evening meal was being served, and the devil had prompted Judas Iscariot, son of Simon, to betray Jesus. Jesus knew that the Father had put all things under his power, and that he had come from God and was returning to God; so he got up from the meal, took off his outer clothing, and wrapped a towel round his waist. After that, he poured water into a basin and began to wash his disciples feet, drying them with the towel that was wrapped round him. He came to Simon Peter, who said to him, " Lord, are you going to wash my feet? " Jesus replied, " You do not realise now what I am doing, but later you will understand. " " No, " said Peter, " you shall never wash my feet. " Jesus answered, " Unless I wash you, you have no part with me. " " Then, Lord, " Simon Peter replied, " Not just my feet but my hands and my head as well! " Jesus answered, " A person who has had a bath needs only to wash his feet; his whole body is clean. And you are clean, though not every one of you. " For he knew who was going to betray him, that was why he said not every one was clean. When he had finished washing their feet, he put on his clothes and returned to his place.

[sharkman]

Funny thing, this. The discussion has moved(over several years) from where does it say in the bible being gay is wrong to where does it say in the New Testament to where does Jesus say being gay is wrong. Next it'll be where does Jesus say it on a Sabbath. Look, you're really not interested in whether the bible is against it or not, why bother asking.

To some others, you really don't want to play the Jesus says game, as if you'll believe its wrong if only it can be shown he said being gay is wrong. Because He says plenty about the selfish, greedy, lying, proud people we have become and if you think he's only about love and forgiveness you haven't read all of His comments in the Bible.

And finally Bubber's latest post: You've gotta be kidding me. Personally I think you are too smart to actually believe that passage is promoting gaydom. You're just jerking the chain as usual.

[newbie]

Interesting given that the Lord's prayer talks about "Lead us not into temptation." The prayer is to God, so who would be doing the leading?

Funny you should mention that. My husband and I were pondering about that very same thing not too long ago.

One of our guesses was that "lead us not into temptation"...means..."not to put us to the test."

I sometimes pray, adding "I'm afraid that I might fail."

Why should we have to guess? The prayer was to God. Does God occasionally lead us into temptation?

[betsy]

Why should we have to guess? The prayer was to God. Does God occasionally lead us into temptation?

Just now I opened up the bible (the same one I've used with the others)....and the version of the Lord's Prayer did say:

"Our Father in Heaven:

may your holy name be honoured;

may your kingdom come;

may your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.

Give us today the food we need.

Forgive us the wrongs that we have done,

as we forgive the wrongs that others have done us

Do not bring us to hard testing,

but keep us safe from the Evil One."

Matthew 6: 10

This was probably in our subconscious (we both have not read the Holy Bible in years)...thus it automatically came out as our "guess" in translation. At least this discussion had me opening the book. I wish to read it page by page.

[betsy]

The prayer was to God. Does God occasionally lead us into temptation?

I don't know if He deliberately throws temptation in our way. But I know that we are faced with situations when our faith in God is tested (just off-hand I recall when one of the apostles denied Christ three times, or the man who had lost everything. The temptation of Christ by the devil in the desert is another....for in our belief, the devil does exists).

[betsy]

Funny thing, this. The discussion has moved(over several years) from where does it say in the bible being gay is wrong to where does it say in the New Testament to where does Jesus say being gay is wrong. Next it'll be where does Jesus say it on a Sabbath. Look, you're really not interested in whether the bible is against it or not, why bother asking.

To some others, you really don't want to play the Jesus says game, as if you'll believe its wrong if only it can be shown he said being gay is wrong. Because He says plenty about the selfish, greedy, lying, proud people we have become and if you think he's only about love and forgiveness you haven't read all of His comments in the Bible.

And finally Bubber's latest post: You've gotta be kidding me. Personally I think you are too smart to actually believe that passage is promoting gaydom. You're just jerking the chain as usual.

Yes we wonder about the authenticity in translation done through the years. The bible that I used is translated in "today's English"...and I've had it since a school girl.

But it is not for me to question its authenticity of translation from actual words of Christ...for then one gets the seed of doubt ingrained in one's mind. And having doubt is one way of losing faith. Besides, somewhere in the bible, Christ had said we should be like children in our belief and faith.

[gc1765]

After 9/11 how many priests stood up and said "let's turn the other cheek" or "let's love our enemies"? None that I can think of. And why do these priests deserve more condemnation than someone like pat robertson who advocates murder, which definately goes against the bible?

How do you know what is being preached in each and every pulpit of every church? So how can you say that the priests had not called for calm and forgiveness? How do you know that the gospel of some mass was not about loving thine enemy?

From the Catholic Church, did the Pope not call for peace and restraint?

Did the Pope not forgive the man who tried to assassinate him? If I remember correctly, the pope even personally visited this man.

I'm sure there are some people in the church (including the pope) who advocated forgiveness, just as there are some people who are married to a person of the opposite sex. On the other hand, there are also some people in the church who advocated military action in afgahnistan, just as there are homosexual members of the church. Why do people want to kick the homosexuals out of the church, but not the people who ignore passages in the bible such as "turn the other cheek" etc...

From the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops:

Therefore, we support efforts of our nation and the international community to seek out and hold accountable, in accord with national and international law, those individuals, groups and governments which are responsible

We acknowledge, however, the right and duty of a nation and the international community to use military force if necessary to defend the common good by protecting the innocent against mass terrorism.

Link

Funny thing, this. The discussion has moved(over several years) from where does it say in the bible being gay is wrong to where does it say in the New Testament to where does Jesus say being gay is wrong. Next it'll be where does Jesus say it on a Sabbath. Look, you're really not interested in whether the bible is against it or not, why bother asking.

I believe it was you who said that the laws of the Old Testament were obsolete after I brought up the passages in the Old Testament about cruel punishment.

[newbie]

Betsy, you fall into the same trap as most Christians when faced with facts. You simply use a bible translation that works for you. Have you ever asked yourself why there are SO many translations out there? Shouldn't God's word be understandable, at least His own prayer? And for the record, children are very misled and gullible.

[betsy]

Betsy, you fall into the same trap as most Christians when faced with facts. You simply use a bible translation that works for you. Have you ever asked yourself why there are SO many translations out there?

Well I don't know if you are a Christian.

Just because the passages in this book does not agree to the liberal ideas does not mean its teachings and words are not facts. Just because you cannot understand it does not mean it is not true.

Just because something has not been proven does not mean it is not a fact.

I quoted exactly from the bible what supports my argument.

There maybe different translations out there (mine is in today's English version).....but you cannot say that just because there are many translations does not mean they were not translated as accurately as possible.

Since we are arguing about the acceptance of homosexuality....how can it be that this practice is also not considered acceptable in other religions, even though some of these religion find it acceptable to have more than one wife. They must consider sex between same gender an un-natural act too.

So why is it so doubtful...and so difficult to accept that Jesus did say this about homosexuality?

Given the example of Bubermiley as to the "evidence" of Jesus' acceptance of homosexuality, it only shows all the more how some liberal thinkers can distort what is just a simple description and mould it to however they wish it to be just so to support their ideas...and the amazing thing is I do not doubt that they do end up eventually truly believing their own "translation."

[newbie]

Since we are arguing about the acceptance of homosexuality....how can it be that this practice is also not considered acceptable in other religions, even though some of these religion find it acceptable to have more than one wife.

In the Anglican Church of Canada, six parishes in the Diocese of New Westminster bless same sex unions, and Dean Peter Elliott of that diocese is a gay man in a committed relationship. [/i]

[newbie]

There maybe different translations out there (mine is in today's English version).....but you cannot say that just because there are many translations does not mean they were not translated as accurately as possible.

I'll bet you wouldn't say that about the New World Translations, or the bible that the Jehovah's Witness use. The King James is universal and it's riddled with contradiction from Genesis to Revelation, but that's another thread.

[newbie]

Well I don't know if you are a Christian.

Just because the passages in this book does not agree to the liberal ideas does not mean its teachings and words are not facts. Just because you cannot understand it does not mean it is not true.

Just because something has not been proven does not mean it is not a fact.

And if I am a Christian I'm not allowed to question authority of the "holy" book, or have my own interpretations? Just because you cannot prove anything you say (other than with a book that hasn't been proven) does not make your arguement and more valid or true than what I have to say.You say I can't understand "it." Please start a biblical thread. I'd love to go verse and chapter with you.

[betsy]

Since we are arguing about the acceptance of homosexuality....how can it be that this practice is also not considered acceptable in other religions, even though some of these religion find it acceptable to have more than one wife.

In the Anglican Church of Canada, six parishes in the Diocese of New Westminster bless same sex unions, and Dean Peter Elliott of that diocese is a gay man in a committed relationship. [/i]

My husband is Anglican. We are married in an Anglican Church long before this happened, and since at the time marriage vows were already being "customed design" to suit each and every one, we insisted on the the old traditional vows. We know that in the end, the Anglican Church had capitulated about homosexuality and that there was bitter dissension between parishioners.

In my view, even if the WHOLE Anglican Church had decided to drastically distort the teachings of Christ ...it doesn't make it right. But then, that is between those who are responsible for it and God. They know (of all people since they've had special schooling to become priests) what their important responsibility was, according to God and the bible.

We do not attend Anglican services.