Anti-Homosexuality is NOT Christian

College Confidential Community
161

<p>"The Catholic Church will NEVER, ever, budge a single inch in its stances on these issues, not in a million years. The Church does not look at itself and wonder how it can fit in more with secular culture; the Church looks at secular culture and ponders how it can fit in more with the Church."</p>

<p>I disagree here. I witnessed many changes in the Catholic church when I was growing up. My dad used to rant about how they changed things to be more similar to the Protestants, to be less rigid, to be less intimidating.</p>

<p>When I was a kid, a woman who had gotten divorced was not welcome in church. How many divorced people go to church now?</p>

<p>Group confessions, women wearing veils in church, the Lord's Prayer, allowing people to go to Mass on Sat. evening instead of Sun. morning, a relaxing of the Lenten fasting guidelines, relaxing of the prohibition against ever stepping foot in a Protestant church...these are just a few of the changes I witnessed.</p>

<p>I don't know if the official stance on divorce & contraception have changed, but those issues used to be viewed with same amount of rigidity as you claim the gay and abortion issues are viewed now.</p>

162

<p>"Score for Fides!"</p>

<p>haha uhh oh, ok don't respond to the response post... </p>

<p>umm...question mark?</p>

<p>w/e this thread is dead, the OP just started another one haha</p>

163

<p>^ Leal, the same thing happened to my grandmother! And the divorce was out of her control, as my grandfather walked out on her after only a few years of marriage and never returned. My grandmother, according to my mother, was not allowed back to the Catholic church. That was...oh, 45 years ago. </p>

<p>My parents recently had some marriage problems. My mom turned to the only person she felt might have some sound advice, our parish priest. He did not blame or reject her. I really do not know what he said, my parents never ended up getting a divorce, but he did help her.</p>

164

<p>I responded to Fides' post because I read it first.</p>

<p>Now I will respond to your response:</p>

<p>"I believe that there is one interpretation of the Bible."</p>

<p>I couldn't disagree more. Proof of the falsity of your statement is the very fact that there ARE so many interpretations, each one starting a new denomination!</p>

<p>Or, are you one of those people who thinks the only 'correct' interpretation is your own?</p>

<p>"And further, even if someone disagrees on one small theological issue, and starts a new denomination, it is not their right to say that another denomination is hellbound"</p>

<p>I agree up to here. That is my biggest complaint about the born-agains - they are so quick to say people are going to 'hell.' How arrogant.</p>

<p>"if all that they are disagreeing on is something theological, and not "behavioral" or something. According to the Bible, salvation is through faith and not through interpreting something a certain way."</p>

<p>No, this is according to your faith's interpretation of the bible. I interpret the bible to support reincarnation. (not that it matters, since I don't believe in the authority of the bible in the first place.) What say you to my post about that?</p>

<p>How is YOUR interpretation any better than MY interpretation? Who gets to decide?</p>

<p>Those in power, that's who.</p>

165

<p>"are you one of those people who thinks the only 'correct' interpretation is your own?"</p>

<p>I never said anything of the sort. What I was trying to say was that if everyone read the Bible one way, there wouldn't be so many denominations. The one way that I am referring to is just the simplest way.</p>

<p>"That is my biggest complaint about the born-agains - they are so quick to say people are going to 'hell.' How arrogant."</p>

<p>Um anyone who is born-again in Christ (truly) cannot judge who is going to Heaven and Hell. And anyone who is born-again in Christ would most likely not say "you are going to hell because ________" The Bible states that the only requirement for salvation is faith in Jesus Christ. Everyone is a sinner, including those born again. No one is "just" going to hell because they sin. I agree that anyone who says "X is going to Hell" is arrogant, but I would not generalize that all Christians do this. I believe that it is wrong to try to judge somone's salvation even if their beliefs differ from your own. You can assume something but you can never know. </p>

<p>"No, this is according to your faith's interpretation of the bible. "</p>

<p>I don't have a "faith" telling me how to interpret the Bible. I interpret it my own way, which is simply and literally, which, coincidently, is how many other Christians interpret it, because many have been born again in Christ and know for ourselves that the Word is inerrant. </p>

<p>"I interpret the bible to support reincarnation. (not that it matters, since I don't believe in the authority of the bible in the first place.) What say you to my post about that?</p>

<p>I read the passages on that web site from your post. Personally, I don't believe that they support reincarnation, but hey, obviously you can believe that. I never said that you couldn't.</p>

<p>"How is YOUR interpretation any better than MY interpretation?"</p>

<p>Well, I'm not telling you to believe what I believe. All I'm saying is what I believe. Nobody said that it was "better," and I don't even know how that makes sense. </p>

<p>"Who gets to decide?</p>

<p>Those in power, that's who.</p>

<p>I disagree, perhaps that applies to some deonominations but basically, you decide for yourself what you believe and what you interpret. I don't believe anything that isn't substantiated by what I personally read in the Bible. I don't just accept things said by people, I accept what is said in the Bible. But that's just the way that I do it.</p>

166

<p>"if everyone read the Bible one way, there wouldn't be so many denominations. The one way that I am referring to is just the simplest way."</p>

<p>But see, they don't read it the same way. So it's unrealistic to think they ever will. And many people, like myself, don't even believe in the bible to begin with.</p>

<p>Um anyone who is born-again in Christ (truly) cannot judge who is going to Heaven and Hell. And anyone who is born-again in Christ would most likely not say "you are going to hell because ________" </p>

<p>But they do. I'm not saying they ALL do, but I do hear that frequently.</p>

<p>"The Bible states that the only requirement for salvation is faith in Jesus Christ."</p>

<p>This too is a judgment. They use this one single passage as a basis for saying all non-Christians (actually, non 'born-again' Christians) are condemned to 'hell.' I find the whole notion ridiculous. I believe in a merciful God who would not condemn ANYONE to everlasting suffering. Even the most horrible sinners would be redeemed, eventually, after a lot of rehabilitation.</p>

<p>By saying there is a 'requirement' for salvation, that is the same as saying those who don't meet the requirement (according to manmade criteria, based on their personal interpretation of a book written by humans) is going to 'hell.' Same thing as what you say they don't do, they do, and you just did.</p>

167

<p>"So it's unrealistic to think they ever will"</p>

<p>Yes this is quite a stretch now, however the early church was, in fact one church.</p>

<p>"And many people, like myself, don't even believe in the bible to begin with."</p>

<p>Well obviously then what I'm saying is not in reference to you, only to people who believe in the authority of the Bible. </p>

<p>"But they do. I'm not saying they ALL do, but I do hear that frequently."</p>

<p>No they don't. Perhaps you're thinking of some judgemental Christian of some kind but anyone who is truly born again would not think this way. There exist evangelical Christians who are NOT born again, who don't exactly know "what's going on" to put it in silly terms. Perhaps you are thinking of these.</p>

<p>"This too is a judgment. "</p>

<p>No it isn't. I am not saying that you need to believe this, all that I am saying is what the Bible says. Anyone can believe what they want. This is simply a restatement of something in the Book. Never did I say that you should believe it. </p>

<p>"I find the whole notion ridiculous. I believe in a merciful God who would not condemn ANYONE to everlasting suffering. Even the most horrible sinners would be redeemed, eventually, after a lot of rehabilitation."</p>

<p>That's what you believe. That's fine. I believe something different. That's fine. But the way you state your beliefs implies that mine are wrong which, is false.</p>

<p>"By saying there is a 'requirement' for salvation, that is the same as saying those who don't meet the requirement (according to manmade criteria, based on their personal interpretation of a book written by humans) is going to 'hell.' Same thing as what you say they don't do, they do, and you just did."</p>

<p>Again, I was not preaching here at all. I was simply restating what the Bible said in order to make a point about the Bible. No where was I implying that anyone was going to Hell or that anyone should believe anything.</p>

168

<p>further:</p>

<p>"Even the most horrible sinners would be redeemed"</p>

<p>I believe this too!!!!! Why do you think that I think that I am saved? Because I don't sin? Nooooo way. I and anyone else is only saved through the mercy of Jesus Christ who forgives us our many, many sins by our faith and repentance in and to Him.</p>

169

<p>same, I apologize if I came across disrespectful of your beliefs, or if I implied that you were like the other Christians I've known. It is refreshing that you are not.</p>

<p>I guess I've had some bad experiences, or maybe it's the area I live in, but over the past 18 years or so, I have had literally DOZENS of Christians tell me the same thing - that they do indeed believe anyone who doesn't believe in the authority of the bible and that Jesus died for their sins, is going to 'hell.' These were people who considered themselves 'born-again' - oh yes, most definitely. Some were into the speaking in tongues thing, and some weren't, but they all considered themselves born-again.</p>

<p>Sometimes they went on to say "then by definition YOU are going to 'hell'" and sometimes they left that to be the obvious next conclusion.</p>

<p>Actually, the bible does NOT say that people who don't believe in the bible/Jesus are going to 'hell.' What it does say is a quote, supposedly from Jesus, saying that he is the 'Way' and the only way to the 'Father' is thru him.</p>

<p>It is an INTERPRETATION that anyone who does not reach the 'Father' goes to 'hell.'</p>

<p>It is also an interpretation that he means 'believe that he died for our sins' - another interpretation (favored by many New Agers and other non-Christians) is that by 'Way' he meant following his EXAMPLE, his PATTERN.</p>

<p>There are many people (more than you might think) who are able to reconcile 'New Age' type beliefs (such as reincarnation and the belief that Jesus was our 'older brother,' an Avatar, whose purpose was to show us how to LOVE) with the bible. </p>

<p>Even though I don't believe it is infallible, even though I don't believe it's any more (or less!) from God than the Illiad or any other great work, I do believe that the bible is very deep and can have multiple layers of meaning.</p>

<p>In that respect, I DO believe God is ultimately behind it, in the same way God is behind everything that happens in our lives. God has set in motion an entire universe for the purpose of mirroring back to us ourselves, so that we can discover our divine nature. (just my opinion of course)</p>

<p>In other words I think it's an oversimplification to say 'well just believe that Jesus died for you and you'll go to heaven.' And yes, I HAVE heard Christians say that. MANY times!</p>

170

<p>"I and anyone else is only saved through the mercy of Jesus Christ who forgives us our many, many sins by our faith and repentance in and to Him."</p>

<p>Well, what about those who just had not yet gotten around to repenting at the time they died? Maybe they died suddenly and just didn't repent yet, or maybe they were very good people but were Buddhist or agnostic. Do you believe they are going to suffer FOREVER in hell?</p>

<hr>

<p>"however the early church was, in fact one church."</p>

<p>That was a political thing. That doesn't necessarily mean that everyone believed the same way. They just didn't always have the freedom to express their 'heretical' beliefs.</p>

<hr>

<p>"But the way you state your beliefs implies that mine are wrong..."</p>

<p>I stated my beliefs by saying "I believe..." I had no idea that saying "I believe..." implied that YOUR beliefs are wrong. I apologize. Please tell me how I may state them in a different way that is less offensive to you.</p>

<hr>

<p>"No where was I implying that anyone was going to Hell or that anyone should believe anything."</p>

<p>Ok, now I am confused. You just said that the bible states that people who don't accept Jesus go to 'hell.' You made it clear that the bible said that, not you. But you also said that you believe it. So if A=B and B=C then A=C. The only conclusion is that you believe any people who don't believe in bible/Jesus are going to 'hell.' Please point out the error in my logic. No sarcasm intended; I am just trying to understand you! </p>

<hr>

<p>"I and anyone else is only saved through the mercy of Jesus Christ who forgives us our many, many sins by our faith and repentance in and to Him."</p>

<p>Right. But the difference is that you believe (as far as I understand anyway) that the only way Jesus will have mercy is if someone repents and accepts him as savior. Am I understanding correctly?</p>

<p>Whereas, I believe true mercy is that which is bestowed even among people who DON'T repent and accept him, for whatever reason - a truly merciful God would be smart enough to figure out a way to have mercy on those poor schmucks too. A truly merciful God would not send someone to suffer FOREVER because they had a problem with arrogance or stupidity or some other inherently human trait. (Just my belief, ok?)</p>

171

<p>
[quote]
Would you support a ban on homosexual relationships/marriages?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>relationships; No. Marriage; Yes. Because, as I said earlier, God says it's a sin (since it's a sin; then so is marriage between same sex couples); and I'm convinced.</p>

172

<p>Don't you think the idea of marriage itself is flawed?</p>

173

<p>I'm tired of people associating conservatism or right wing politics with Christianity.</p>

174

<p>I'm tired of people holding the traditions and history of marriage like it has always been some holy, purely love, form of dedication. First, "marriage" was basically just two individuals getting together for the sake of increasing there, and there family's wealth; whether it be ancient african tribes or early aged europe, it was a form of wealth: getting dowries, getting connections, etc. </p>

<p>Then, when the Church started holding marriage "ceremonies", it was meant as another way for them to make money. They deemed you no sufficiently married unless it was done by a priest in a holy place (the church), to do this you of course had to pay them fees and what not. It was like indulgences, used for the church to make money, not a whole lot more.</p>

175

<p>lealdragon: you misunderstood me. i didn't say that i don't believe that certain people are condemned, as it says in the Bible. i was simply saying that i was not trying to convince you of my beliefs.</p>

<p>smallz3141: marriage is in the Bible, it's not just a secular thing. if you don't subscribe to Biblical authority, ok, but it is a "holy" et cetera institution.</p>

176

<p>
[quote]
smallz3141: marriage is in the Bible, it's not just a secular thing. if you don't subscribe to Biblical authority, ok, but it is a "holy" et cetera institution.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>haha. yea, because I'm so sure that the Bible would quickly admit to it using marriage as a money maker. ever wonder why indulgences aren't mentioned in the bible? Same thing.</p>

177

<p>huh? umm the Bible glorifies many aspects of marriage...</p>

<p>anyhow, as i said, you don't have to believe in the Bible. but just know that marriage is in the Bible a LOT.</p>

178

<p>
[quote]
just know that marriage is in the Bible a LOT

[/quote]
</p>

<p>but what does that mean? because they mention it a lot means it only had good denotations in the past? I'm telling you what the Church did, and what marriage really meant, not what one book decrees.</p>

179

<p>Sorry for the misunderstanding.</p>

<p>I guess I have a hard time understanding how anyone can feel attracted to a religion that condemns people. A God like that doesn't sound very nice.</p>

180

<p>The current given definition of marriage is flawed because it creates a disparity between two classes. Not only that...it is an unnecessary intrusion on the seperation of church and state.</p>