[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by gobear *
**That should read
I respect you opinion tho I disagree. It doesn’t matter if homosexuality is practiced by every culture there is. The amount of people participating in something isn’t an indicator of it’s rightness or wrongness. What God says about it is what matters, and I’ve already shared what He says about it so since we cannot agree how about we just move on as I said to someone else. You asked my opinion and I wasn’t going to lie to you. Sorry.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by gobear *
**That should read
I respect you opinion tho I disagree. It doesn’t matter if homosexuality is practiced by every culture there is. The amount of people participating in something isn’t an indicator of it’s rightness or wrongness. What God says about it is what matters, and I’ve already shared what He says about it so since we cannot agree how about we just move on as I said to someone else. You asked my opinion and I wasn’t going to lie to you. Sorry.
Sorry for the double post!! I’m having problems as navigation on this board appears to be very slow.:smack:
FWIW plenty of Lutherans use the same apostle’s creed as I learned in catechism, word for word. Remember “catholic” means universal but it’s taken on a connotation of Roman Catholic for many people. I was actually a little suprised when I went with my folks to an ELCA church in Tucson where they substituted “Christian” for catholic in the creed.
“Apollo’s Creed?” whatchootalkin’aboutfool?
No, you arrogant fundie, you shared, and only shared, what youTHINK he says about it.
Kirk
Hmm, I’ll try. I’m sure it’s true that people have homosexual tendencies just as the heterosexual has sexual desire, etc. However, just as I believe that God says homosexuality is a sin, He also says that any heterosexual sex outside of marriage is a sin (fornication). I don’t necessarily think the homosexual tendency is sin, but it’s the actual carrying out of the tendency that’s the sin, just as it would be a sin for an unmarried heterosexual to engage in sex or a married heterosexual to engage in sex with anyone other than their spouse. Perhaps you’re right and the orientation may not be a choice, but the acting out of it IS a choice. My intent here was not to make anyone angry but I can’t lie either if I’m asked about something. Sorry, but I can’t. Just as God tells us to flee fornication, He tells us plainly (at least to me and many many others) that homosexuality is a sin. But as I don’t wish to cause a riot or anything, how about we all agree to disagree, okay? I just cannot agree that something is okay when I know God says different. So we can go on to something else.
Yes, but why? In the end, this comes down to a cop-out answer. Haven’t you noticed by now that if you don’t give an answer other than “it’s in the Bible,” people don’t accept it? You can ascribe their rejection of one of God’s statements to a lack of grace on their part, but you haven’t really done a whole lot to help, have you? To the contrary, you’ve portrayed Christianity as a set of arbitrary rules that hates gays.
Have you ever heard of the sin of scandal? According to the Catholics (take this with a grain of scandal, willya?), it’s “an attitude or behavior which leads another to do evil. The person who gives scandal becomes his neighbor’s tempter. He damages virtue and integrity; he may even draw his brother into spiritual death. Scandal is a grave offense if by deed or omission another is led into grave offense.”*
It’s like putting a drink in front of a recovering alcoholic. While you’re not responsible for the damage that person does to himself, you ARE morally complicit for leading him into danger. Consider it a subset of “thou shalt not kill” if you REALLY need Biblical support for this thing.
So as a premise, let’s assume God opposes homosexuality. As a Christian, your duty is to lead others to God. You are not responsible for another individual’s moral choices, but you are responsible for the direction you push others in. Cain asked God, “Am I my brother’s keeper?” Under the Christian tradition, the answer tends to be “Hell, yes.”
So…take a good look over the responses here. Your responses are not generating a lot of support for the Almighty’s proclamations here, because on a board where people are driven to find intellectual answers (and note that God has ingrained these people withan intellectual thirst), you’re providing a childish “God says so” with nothing else. Chances are, you’re secretly content that you know better, and it’s their own fault they don’t accept God as you do. Sorry, but people see through that, and all you’ve done is conveyed the impression that 1) Christians are arrogant, smug, and follow orders without question, and 2) therefore, it’s wrong to be a Christian.
I’ll pray for you. Try again.
*Catechism of the Catholic Church, section 2284.
His4ever: I don’t think I’d be misrepresenting your position if I said that you believe that the Bible is the abscolute word of God and overrules any reasoning to the contrary (please correct me if this is not the case)…
Would you mind explaining how you came to occupy this position of belief; in other words what is it exactly that caused you to believe that the Bible* is the final authority?
(*in fact your interpretation thereof).
First of all, {B]Guin**, Polycarp, Res and some others–you are, in my eyes, examples of true Christians. You guys rock! 
Second, His, IMHO means “in my humble opinion.”
Third, I just happen to have a copy of the Bible right here. If you can honestly tell me that you keep the word of every law in Leviticus (like, not going to church for 33 days after you’ve had a baby boy, or 36 days after you’ve had a baby girl) or not allowing a man who is blind, lame, flat nosed, crookbacked, a dwarf, scurvilous, scabbed, or has a broken foot, hand or testicles (testicles?!) serve in church, then you can condemn homosexuality. Until then, let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
First of all, Guin, Polycarp, Res and some others–you are, in my eyes, examples of true Christians. You guys rock!
Second, His, IMHO means “in my humble opinion.”
Third, I just happen to have a copy of the Bible right here. If you can honestly tell me that you keep the word of every law in Leviticus (like, not going to church for 33 days after you’ve had a baby boy, or 36 days after you’ve had a baby girl) or not allowing a man who is blind, lame, flat nosed, crookbacked, a dwarf, scurvilous, scabbed, or has a broken foot, hand or testicles (testicles?!) serve in church, then you can condemn homosexuality. Until then, let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
Which is the problem with Chick Tracts to begin with. I wonder how many people have been driven away from Christ because of reading a Chick Tract?
God doesn’t make people intellectual, anyway it’s not a sin to be intellectual, only to carry out intellectual acts.
Dammit.
Most of you probably figured out that I meant “grain of salt.” For the rest of you–well…that’s what I meant.
“Freudian slip”: [N.] When you say one thing when you’re thinking of a mother. --Cliff Claven
Probably very few. Those smart enough to recognize Chick for the scab-like postule on the posterior of humanity that he is, are likely smart enough to also recognize that Christianity is nothing like anything espoused by Chick-ster, fundie or other cultist.
Kirk
Pardon the bad grammar in the last post. Stupid-no-edit-feature.
Where you say that we only need to believe in Christ, I offer this:
Thanks for the Scriptural Cheat Sheet, peeps!
Well isn’t that the nicest thing anyone’s ever said to me! Bless yer socks off!
Esprix
And may I also add that no matter what religious beliefs they hold, many from perhaps the “gay community” of the SDMB are people I would consider true friends and in their words and actions, I see the spirit of Christ? (Whatsoever you do to the least of my people…)
So you see? We are all the least of his people, therefore, we are all a part of each other? No matter what?
I believe that would be in Revelations 22:22
“And God said, Let there be Esprix.”
And there was Esprix, and he was fabulous.