Breaking Bad Religion

[Carrikature]

Sex isn't just pleasurable, it's sacramental: when a man and a woman come together in marriage, knowing and accepting the possibility that their loving union may result in the creation of a new life, their sex becomes a unique kind of participation in imaging God's love.

I suspect you're in for a rude awakening when and if the time comes.

[Spartacus]

I suspect you're in for a rude awakening when and if the time comes.

I suspect a rude awakening or two is inevitable when you begin to share a bed with another person.

[tabibito]

For example, the Bible quite clearly condemns homosexuality in both the Jewish Testament and the Christian Testament (although it is more clearly condemned in the Tanakh).

Yep - and if a prophet with the requisite credentials arises and declares that homosexuality isn't a sin, I'll be among the first to cheer. Until then, I'm stuck with the fact that every prophet with the requisite bonafides who ever addressed the issue has declared homosexuality to be a sin.

Since modern society is abandoning this condemnation due to the realization that homosexuals are born that way and it is not a "lifestyle choice," - or; sin - should the dogma of Sola Scriptura be abandoned, since the book is clearly wrong in this instance?

Scientific evidence supporting this contention does not exist. Hellenistic society of 2000 years ago considered homosexuality to be acceptable. Man is not appointed to decide what God is allowed to find acceptable.

And, what about the role of women in ministry? In many denominations of Protestant and all of Catholic churches, women assume a secondary role in the Church under the "headship" (Paul's word) of men. Is it not time for this to evolve?

The western churches consistently ignored Paul's pronouncements on this issue for the first 300+ years of their existence. Eastern churches for considerably longer. It can readily be demonstrated from scripture, both testaments, that God did not feel it necessary to submit to Paul's edicts on this matter. With that in mind, what you are calling evolution on this issue would be no more than restoration of the default settings.

[shunyadragon]

Yep - and if a prophet with the requisite credentials arises and declares that homosexuality isn't a sin, I'll be among the first to cheer. Until then, I'm stuck with the fact that every prophet with the requisite bonafides who ever addressed the issue has declared homosexuality to be a sin.

You likely do not consider Baha'u'llah a prophet, but nonetheless, He has confirmed that homosexuality is forbidden by spiritual law.

Scientific evidence supporting this contention does not exist. Hellenistic society of 2000 years ago considered homosexuality to be acceptable. Man is not appointed to decide what God is allowed to find acceptable.

The view that if science has demonstrated that homosexuality maybe be a natural 'born that way and not a lifestyle choice,' does not justify that it is an acceptable moral behavior and lifestyle. Modern science has demonstrated many forms of immoral behavior as 'born that way and not a lifestyle choice,' that would not be considered moral by any acceptable standard in the modern world. As with Hellenist Greece and Rome, our modern world tends to justify immoral behavior by egocentric reasons.

The western churches consistently ignored Paul's pronouncements on this issue for the first 300+ years of their existence. Eastern churches for considerably longer. It can readily be demonstrated from scripture, both testaments, that God did not feel it necessary to submit to Paul's edicts on this matter. With that in mind, what you are calling evolution on this issue would be no more than restoration of the default settings.

The churches of the world represent a mixed problematic view of morality clinging to an ancient outdated world view to justify their existence. Paul's pronouncements cut many ways justifying both good and moral behavior, and unacceptable behavior in the modern context, such as the modern consequences of his pronouncements concerning Jews.

Evolution is a well documented scientific foundation for the physical nature of what it means to be human, but there is also the spiritual evolution of the nature of what it means to be human, which is a higher standard of what is moral and ethical.

[tabibito]

Modern science has demonstrated many forms of immoral behavior as 'born that way and not a lifestyle choice,' that would not be considered moral by any acceptable standard in the modern world.

True enough, but the claim that science has shown it to be an innate (whether hereditary or congenital) trait is simply false. Even the possibility of certain genes pre-disposing (as opposed to dictating) homosexuality is highly questionable.

As with Hellenist Greece and Rome, our modern world tends to justify immoral behavior by egocentric reasons.

Agreed. I find the modern world's concepts of morality somewhat hypocritical, and at times thoroughly untenable.

Paul's pronouncements cut many ways justifying both good and moral behavior, and unacceptable behavior in the modern context, such as the modern consequences of his pronouncements concerning Jews.

Unacceptable behaviour in the modern context has a lot of room for improvement. But - Paul's pronouncements concerning the Jews .... not sure what's happening there.

[Spartacus]

I suspect you're in for a rude awakening when and if the time comes.

Just so that you have something more substantial to chew on:

it's not as though every time I go to Mass, I feel or expect to feel something profound. Sometimes I just sit, stand, and kneel for however long it goes. It's not as though I doubt the Real Presence, but I don't "feel" it every time or nearly every time.

[NormATive]

Yep - and if a prophet with the requisite credentials arises and declares that homosexuality isn't a sin, I'll be among the first to cheer. Until then, I'm stuck with the fact that every prophet with the requisite bonafides who ever addressed the issue has declared homosexuality to be a sin.

OK, consider me your prophet! Gay is OKAY!

Scientific evidence supporting this contention does not exist.

Actually, it does: http://www.morganclaypool.com/doi/ab...urnalCode=dbr&

But, that's really beside the point. We value our freedom in this country. Who we have relationships with should be nobody's business but our own. Most gay folks just want the same rights and equal protection under the law you and I enjoy. To be honest with you, I don't think the State should regulate marriage at all. The notion that just because you are married, you deserve a tax credit, or that we need the State to "sanction it" runs counter to the equal protection clause in our Constitution (14th Amendment). So, if heterosexual couples get tax benefits, special treatment concerning access to healthcare, visitation rights and rights to make medical decisions, and homosexual couples do not - well; that's un-American!

Hellenistic society of 2000 years ago considered homosexuality to be acceptable. Man is not appointed to decide what God is allowed to find acceptable.

Absolutely! The GOVERNED make the rules! We have evolved as a society to embrace homosexuals as equals. They are not sinners in our eyes. We should not allow ancient writings and prejudices dictate how we govern our society. Didn't Jesus say that the Sabbath is for man, not the other way around:

Then Jesus said to them, "The Sabbath was made to meet the needs of people, and not people to meet the requirements of the Sabbath. - Mark 2:27

The western churches consistently ignored Paul's pronouncements on this issue for the first 300+ years of their existence. Eastern churches for considerably longer. It can readily be demonstrated from scripture, both testaments, that God did not feel it necessary to submit to Paul's edicts on this matter. With that in mind, what you are calling evolution on this issue would be no more than restoration of the default settings.

I've not heard that Western churches allowed homosexuality for the first 300+ years" as did Eastern churches "for considerably longer," but it makes some sense, since we know that Greek and Roman society was tolerant of homosexuality.

It also fits with the theory that Christianity itself evolved quite radically over the first two or three hundred years.

Societal evolution can mean returning again to a right conclusion. It doesn't always have to be a linear progression. The act of evolving is correcting for a discovered wrong. I think this is what is happening today with homosexuality. The question is, will the Church join the rest of us?

NORM

[Jedidiah]

Norm, what are your " requisite credentials?"

[NormATive]

Norm, what are your " requisite credentials?"

What do you mean?

NORM