Is pro-gay Christianity really a tenable position?

[Forever_Catholic]

If I may, is there any clear reason to believe that Church doctrine is not meant to develop and improve as social understanding does?

Yes, there is a clear reason. Social understanding is very changeable and not necessarily right. God never changes and is always right. Church doctrine is infallible on matters of faith and morals because it is always guided by the Holy Spirit, as Jesus said it would be.

 

[LuisDantas]

Yes, there is a clear reason. Social understanding is very changeable and not necessarily right. God never changes and is always right. Church doctrine is infallible on matters of faith and morals because it is always guided by the Holy Spirit, as Jesus said it would be.

It is your privilege to take such a reading, of course. But it sure looks lacking in faith to me! Among other reasons, because it implies that humanity can't possibly learn anything significant in over two millenia.

Would God create humanity quite that flawed? I don't think so. And I don't really expect a person of faith to, either.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Due to overpopulation. Yes.

Overpopulation is a myth dreamed up by misanthropic eugenicists who had/have a lot of money to push it on the masses. The lunatic moron, Ehrlich, was dead wrong. The reverse is happening. The birthrate is collapsing more and more across the developed world, so perhaps they got their wish but not necessarily in the way they expected (or maybe they did?).

Now how the hell did my thread get derailed so badly?

 

[LuisDantas]

Overpopulation is a myth dreamed up by misanthropic eugenicists who had/have a lot of money to push it on the masses. The lunatic moron, Ehrlich, was dead wrong. The reverse is happening. The birthrate is collapsing more and more across the developed world, so perhaps they got their wish but not necessarily in the way they expected (or maybe they did?).

It seems to me that if anything you are agreeing with me without realizing it. Even in the developed world there is hardly any evidence or perspective of having too few births.

Now how the hell did my thread get derailed so badly?

IMO, when it was created in a debate area. That is somewhat expected.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

It seems to me that if anything you are agreeing with me without realizing it. Even in the developed world there is hardly any evidence or perspective of having too few births.

I'd like to know where you get your information from. Let me google that for you

IMO, when it was created in a debate area. That is somewhat expected.

I asked more than once for the staff to move this to Comparative Religion. I'm sick of people getting off topic.

 

[LuisDantas]

I'd like to know where you get your information from. Let me google that for you

What of that?

I asked more than once for the staff to move this to Comparative Religion. I'm sick of people getting off topic.

Maybe you want to talk about this on Site Feedback? I think it would be a good idea.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Maybe you want to talk about this on Site Feedback? I think it would be a good idea.

You have to make a thread on Site Feedback now? Before you just had to ask in the thread and it was moved.

 

[LuisDantas]

You have to make a thread on Site Feedback now? Before you just had to ask in the thread and it was moved.

You are asking now about staff activity, and you probably know already that we can't talk about that in the public areas.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

You are asking now about staff activity, and you probably know already that we can't talk about that in the public areas.

Seriously, Luis?

 

[Vishvavajra]

Yes, there is a clear reason. Social understanding is very changeable and not necessarily right. God never changes and is always right. Church doctrine is infallible on matters of faith and morals because it is always guided by the Holy Spirit, as Jesus said it would be.

Unless this is a new form of idolatry I wasn't aware of, church doctrine isn't God. Furthermore, Church doctrine does change. It has changed numerous times over the centuries. Not just in small ways, either: the primary atonement theory shifted in the 13th century, with the one that had dominated the first thousand years being more or less relegated to the dustbin. The Immaculate Conception was concocted in response to the discovery of the human egg cell, which overturned thousands of years of belief about human reproduction and showed that the mother does in fact contribute equally to the genetic makeup of a child. The Church didn't come out in categorical opposition to slavery until 1965. It's gone from being pro-war to mostly anti-war, pro-death-penalty to anti-death-penalty. Various councils have nullified the doctrines that were ratified in previous councils. It has a tendency to lag behind social understanding, but it's moving on the same axis and always has been.

In short, Church doctrine is crafted by men who are fallible, and even they admit as much. The very best case scenario is that they are inspired by the Spirit but retain an imperfect understanding. Worst case scenario is that they're stumbling around in the dark and dragging everyone else with them. The idea that Church doctrine is dictated directly by God and is unchanging and infallible is a phantasm that the most cursory glance at history will dispel.

I'm not even gong to touch the fact that Jesus never talked about the Church one way or the other, as such a thing hadn't even been conceived of in the 1st century.

 

[LuisDantas]

Seriously, Luis?

Yeah. Very seriously indeed. Didn't you know?

 

[Forever_Catholic]

Unless this is a new form of idolatry I wasn't aware of, church doctrine isn't God. Furthermore, Church doctrine does change. It has changed numerous times over the centuries. Not just in small ways, either: the primary atonement theory shifted in the 13th century, with the one that had dominated the first thousand years being more or less relegated to the dustbin. The Immaculate Conception was concocted in response to the discovery of the human egg cell, which overturned thousands of years of belief about human reproduction and showed that the mother does in fact contribute equally to the genetic makeup of a child. The Church didn't come out in categorical opposition to slavery until 1965. It's gone from being pro-war to mostly anti-war, pro-death-penalty to anti-death-penalty. Various councils have nullified the doctrines that were ratified in previous councils. It has a tendency to lag behind social understanding, but it's moving on the same axis and always has been.

In short, Church doctrine is crafted by men who are fallible, and even they admit as much. The very best case scenario is that they are inspired by the Spirit but retain an imperfect understanding. Worst case scenario is that they're stumbling around in the dark and dragging everyone else with them. The idea that Church doctrine is dictated directly by God and is unchanging and infallible is a phantasm that the most cursory glance at history will dispel.

I'm not even gong to touch the fact that Jesus never talked about the Church one way or the other, as such a thing hadn't even been conceived of in the 1st century.

You must have misread that post. I didn't say doctrine never changes, I said God never changes. And how can you say Jesus never talked about the Church one way or another? He talked about it quite a bit. He called it "my church." He was talking about it when he said this to the apostles in John 14:26: "But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you."

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Is anti-gay Christianity really a tenable position, given Christ's teachings on unconditional love?

 

[psychoslice]

Is anti-gay Christianity really a tenable position, given Christ's teachings on unconditional love?

Yes I agree, how can anyone hate homosexuals if they are full of love, its impossible, that is if you are not a loveable person, and if your not, then why ?.

 

[Eliab ben Benjamin]

In Matthew 19:12, Jesus mentions eunuchs in the context of whether it is good to marry. He says, “There are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others—and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.” Jesus identifies three types of “eunuchs” here: natural eunuchs (“born that way”), forced eunuchs (“made eunuchs by others”), and voluntary eunuchs (“those who choose”).

Natural eunuchs include those who are born with a physical defect, but they also comprise those who are born with no real desire for marriage or sex. Forced eunuchs are those who have been castrated for whatever reason. Voluntary eunuchs are those who, in order to better serve the Lord in some capacity, choose to forego marriage. God calls some people to remain single (and therefore celibate). Paul speaks of those who serve the Lord in their unmarried state in 1 Corinthians 7:7—9.

Read more: What is a eunuch in the Bible? What does the Bible say about eunuchs?

 

[Tumah]

Norman: You don't need the word only. And Yes they were and Jesus answered them. During the time of the Savior’s mortal ministry, divorce was a vexing issue, debated without resolution among rabbis. For many people, divorce was justified even for trivial reasons. The Pharisees sought to involve Jesus in the controversy by asking His opinion about divorce. In the first part of his response...

What in the name of all that's holy and pure?!?!?

 

[Servant_of_the_One1]

@Saint Frankenstein thank you for seeking knowledge from the Bible.
This Kumbaya thing with gays and female priests that we see today amongst christians opposes the true message of the bible.


The fact that Jesus pbuh or other prophets didnt talk much about Homosexuality is because 100% of the people at that time agreed homosexuality( sex between man and man, woman and woman) is sin and must be avoided. The Jews had strict laws for homosexuality which is killing them. Jesus pbuh said nothing from the law of Moses will be changed, so that means ruling on homos stays the same unless Jesus pbuh said " you can be homosexual without earthly&heavenly punishment ,halleluja!, may God bless u!".

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

There’s no tolerance for homosexual acts in the Bible or in private revelation and no support for homosexuality in ancient Jewish or Christian societies, even though it seems to have been okay with people in ancient pagan cultures. There is support for it in much of contemporary secular society, and even growing support within certain Christian Churches. In fact, here’s a cut and paste from a news article:

DETROIT (AP) 20 Jun 14 - The top legislative body of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has voted by large margins to recognize same-sex marriage as Christian in the church constitution, adding language that marriage can be the union of "two people," not just "a man and a woman." …

So there’s some pro-gay Christianity, but it‘s people in a church voting on whether God is right or wrong. One more reason to love the Catholic Church, in my opinion -- societal indoctrination doesn’t get to supersede the Holy Spirit. And what's the point anyway of making a church conform to public opinion? Redefining a truth does not make a new truth.

A bright side of the Catholic Church for gays could be that they are welcome in it. We have categories of sin for everyone. Heterosexual pleasures of the flesh are sins too, outside of marriage. The love of a man’s life might be a woman he can’t have, can’t touch, can’t even desire without sinning. No slack will be given. There’s no getting a pass for lying, stealing, pride, envy, gluttony, or any other of our innumerable sins and potential sins.

We’re all a bunch of sinners, each with his or her own particular temptations, weaknesses, and sinful attachments. We can only fight against ours, support others fighting against theirs, ask for forgiveness as needed, and trust in the Divine Mercy. We can help each other get to heaven.

What does the Bible have to say about slavery? What does the Catholic Church?

You talk about other denominations "voting on whether God is right or wrong"; isn't this precisely what the Catholic Church has done?

... or if you think that the current position of the Catholic Church on this issue is the one endorsed by God, then how did the Church get it so disastrously wrong for more than a millenium?

It's hypocritical for a church that now holds an anti-slavery and pro-gender equality (sorta) stance to say that on the issue of homosexuality - and homosexuality alone, apparently - they're unwilling to budge from the position of the one faction of early Christians they descended from.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Yes, there is a clear reason. Social understanding is very changeable and not necessarily right. God never changes and is always right. Church doctrine is infallible on matters of faith and morals because it is always guided by the Holy Spirit, as Jesus said it would be.

Again: so you support the original position of the Catholic Church on slavery, then? Do you agree with what Pope Pius IX wrote in 1866?

"Slavery itself, considered as such in its essential nature, is not at all contrary to the natural and divine law, and there can be several just titles of slavery, and these are referred to by approved theologians and commentators of the sacred canons … It is not contrary to the natural and divine law for a slave to be sold, bought, exchanged or given".

 

[Augustus]

This topic has nothing to do with what the majority of Christians believe now, but what ancient Jews and Christians believed about it.

This article has a pretty thorough discussion about what the Jews and Jesus probably thought from the 'no' perspective.

http://www.robgagnon.net/articles/ChristianSexualityArticle2003.pdf