OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 25, 2014, 04:41:53 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Sodogamy vs. homosexual  (Read 12118 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 7,865


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« on: September 06, 2012, 06:13:21 PM »

The word "gay" used to mean "happy."
Now that word is banned on other forums.

The word "homosexual" was coined per Father Patrick:
Quote
A new word has recently been coined . . .

Although it has not yet made its way into the English dictionary, it does deserve such admission, in my opinion.

The word is sodogamy and speaks for itself.

By the by, I am on record (for more than a half-century) as opposed to the word “homosexual.” This alleged word is what grammarians call a bastard progeny, because it conjoins alien etymological roots.

In this case, the Greek root homo and the Latin root sexus were combined to form “homosexual,” the malformed progeny of a truly unnatural union.

That is to say, “homosexual” came of joining things in a way they were never intended to be joined.


http://www.monomakhos.com/removing-metropolitan-jonah-hurt-the-american-orthodox-church/#comment-33135

I too prefer the word sodogamy as it describes what it is.
Let us campaign to return the word "gay" back to the good old days, and retire the word "homosexual."
« Last Edit: September 06, 2012, 06:14:30 PM by Maria » Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,618


Teaching on the mountain


« Reply #1 on: September 06, 2012, 06:25:10 PM »

The word "gay" used to mean "happy."
Now that word is banned on other forums.

The word "homosexual" was coined per Father Patrick:
Quote
A new word has recently been coined . . .

Although it has not yet made its way into the English dictionary, it does deserve such admission, in my opinion.

The word is sodogamy and speaks for itself.

By the by, I am on record (for more than a half-century) as opposed to the word “homosexual.” This alleged word is what grammarians call a bastard progeny, because it conjoins alien etymological roots.

In this case, the Greek root homo and the Latin root sexus were combined to form “homosexual,” the malformed progeny of a truly unnatural union.

That is to say, “homosexual” came of joining things in a way they were never intended to be joined.


http://www.monomakhos.com/removing-metropolitan-jonah-hurt-the-american-orthodox-church/#comment-33135

I too prefer the word sodogamy as it describes what it is.
Let us campaign to return the word "gay" back to the good old days, and retire the word "homosexual."

Or you could get a life instead of campaigning for silly stuff. And so can father Patrick.
Logged
Jetavan
Most Humble Servant of Pan-Vespuccian and Holocenic Hominids
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christic
Jurisdiction: Dixie
Posts: 6,285


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #2 on: September 06, 2012, 06:25:33 PM »

The word "gay" used to mean "happy."
Now that word is banned on other forums.

The word "homosexual" was coined per Father Patrick:
Quote
A new word has recently been coined . . .

Although it has not yet made its way into the English dictionary, it does deserve such admission, in my opinion.

The word is sodogamy and speaks for itself.

By the by, I am on record (for more than a half-century) as opposed to the word “homosexual.” This alleged word is what grammarians call a bastard progeny, because it conjoins alien etymological roots.

In this case, the Greek root homo and the Latin root sexus were combined to form “homosexual,” the malformed progeny of a truly unnatural union.

That is to say, “homosexual” came of joining things in a way they were never intended to be joined.


http://www.monomakhos.com/removing-metropolitan-jonah-hurt-the-american-orthodox-church/#comment-33135

I too prefer the word sodogamy as it describes what it is.
Let us campaign to return the word "gay" back to the good old days, and retire the word "homosexual."

So Greek and Latin
must forever contend,
and never shall the twain
as one
remain?
« Last Edit: September 06, 2012, 06:27:58 PM by Jetavan » Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
Tallitot
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jewish
Jurisdiction: United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism
Posts: 2,573



WWW
« Reply #3 on: September 06, 2012, 06:51:07 PM »

I too prefer the word sodogamy as it describes what it is.
Let us campaign to return the word "gay" back to the good old days, and retire the word "homosexual."

What is that? The ancient Japanese art of homosexuals folding paper?
Logged

Proverbs 22:7
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Online Online

Faith: BZZT
Posts: 29,272



« Reply #4 on: September 06, 2012, 06:52:36 PM »

What a queer thread.
Logged

Optimist: Throw enough ideas at the wall and one is bound to stick.
Pessimist: Throw enough poo at the wall and the room is bound to stink.
Realist: You don't really need to throw things at walls to solve problems.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #5 on: September 06, 2012, 06:57:31 PM »

The word "gay" used to mean "happy."
Now that word is banned on other forums.

The word "homosexual" was coined per Father Patrick:
Quote
A new word has recently been coined . . .

Although it has not yet made its way into the English dictionary, it does deserve such admission, in my opinion.

The word is sodogamy and speaks for itself.

By the by, I am on record (for more than a half-century) as opposed to the word “homosexual.” This alleged word is what grammarians call a bastard progeny, because it conjoins alien etymological roots.

In this case, the Greek root homo and the Latin root sexus were combined to form “homosexual,” the malformed progeny of a truly unnatural union.

That is to say, “homosexual” came of joining things in a way they were never intended to be joined.


http://www.monomakhos.com/removing-metropolitan-jonah-hurt-the-american-orthodox-church/#comment-33135

I too prefer the word sodogamy as it describes what it is.
Let us campaign to return the word "gay" back to the good old days, and retire the word "homosexual."

Or you could get a life instead of campaigning for silly stuff. And so can father Patrick.
You're the only one campaigning for silly stuff.  Few things are sillier than socialism, as shown in the comparison between the Erie and Danube canals.  Or do you have a different accounting on the comparison?  Let's have it.

Do you tell Fr. Pat that, or are you waging a silly campaign behind his back with what you wouldn't say to his face?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
LBK
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,160


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #6 on: September 06, 2012, 07:02:44 PM »

Sodogamy? Or does this mean that lesbianism is OK? At least homosexual applies to both versions of same-sex attraction. As for mixing Latin and Greek roots, the English language does this all the time: Television, anyone?
Logged
Jetavan
Most Humble Servant of Pan-Vespuccian and Holocenic Hominids
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christic
Jurisdiction: Dixie
Posts: 6,285


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #7 on: September 06, 2012, 07:17:32 PM »

Sodogamy? Or does this mean that lesbianism is OK? At least homosexual applies to both versions of same-sex attraction. As for mixing Latin and Greek roots, the English language does this all the time: Television, anyone?
"Sodogamy" is a mix of roots, too: "-gamy" is from the Greek, whereas "sodom-" is not.
Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #8 on: September 06, 2012, 07:23:26 PM »

Sodogamy? Or does this mean that lesbianism is OK? At least homosexual applies to both versions of same-sex attraction. As for mixing Latin and Greek roots, the English language does this all the time: Television, anyone?
"Sodogamy" is a mix of roots, too: "-gamy" is from the Greek, whereas "sodom-" is not.
Sodom is from the Greek form of the place name.

Sodomy, however, is not an Orthodox word (Fr. Pat is somewhat still living in captivity to the West).
Quote
LOL. "Sodomy" didn't enter Orthodox parlance until Czar Peter, in imitation of all things Latin, put it there.  And even then, it refers to homosexuality (in German it means bestiality).  There are earlier references to homosexuality in connection with Sodom's damnation, but the term doesn't come into use until the 11th century, in the West.
I apologized for not being so well versed. It doesn't matter what its called, it is sinful.

I'll admit, you have me a tad bit confused. You say that Orthodox who view oral sex as sin also classify french kissing as sin. Now, a lot is lost over the internet, but it seemed to me that you disagreed with viewing oral sex as sinful when you used that comparison. Do you view french kissing as a sin? Fr. Josiah clearly thinks oral sex is a sin.

I guess I just don't see why me using the word "sodomy" was so "LOL" worthy. It was vocabulary. The meaning remains the same.
not exactly: it comes with baggage.

I said that the material that some Orthodox depend on to justify their views on oral sex, said material also condemns french kissing.

I can quite easily accurately state the opinions of others while disagreeing with them.  I disagree with Fr. Josiah.

No, I don't view french kissing as a sin-depending on with whom.  Nor, for that matter, oral sex.

Nektarios attempted to dismiss Orthodox morality in general by claiming that no Orthodox priest would not preach the truth as he sees it and risk his paycheck.  Whatever else his faults, Fr. Trenham is not for hire.
« Last Edit: September 06, 2012, 07:33:39 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #9 on: September 06, 2012, 07:35:56 PM »

Sodogamy? Or does this mean that lesbianism is OK?
Depends if the heart of "sodomy" revolves around "wasting seed."  That is something that seems to be at the core (but perhaps not limited to) Fr. Pat's objection to it.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
LBK
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,160


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #10 on: September 06, 2012, 07:47:18 PM »

Sodogamy? Or does this mean that lesbianism is OK?
Depends if the heart of "sodomy" revolves around "wasting seed."  That is something that seems to be at the core (but perhaps not limited to) Fr. Pat's objection to it.

I should have put this smiley  Roll Eyes in my post. BTW, is Fr Patrick a graduate of St Vladimirs?
Logged
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church
Posts: 12,661


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #11 on: September 06, 2012, 07:51:23 PM »

Sodogamy? Or does this mean that lesbianism is OK?
Depends if the heart of "sodomy" revolves around "wasting seed."  That is something that seems to be at the core (but perhaps not limited to) Fr. Pat's objection to it.

I should have put this smiley  Roll Eyes in my post. BTW, is Fr Patrick a graduate of St Vladimirs?

No, but he did go to St. Tikhon's.

http://www.allsaintsorthodox.org/pastor/bio.php
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
Jetavan
Most Humble Servant of Pan-Vespuccian and Holocenic Hominids
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christic
Jurisdiction: Dixie
Posts: 6,285


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #12 on: September 06, 2012, 08:40:49 PM »

Sodogamy? Or does this mean that lesbianism is OK? At least homosexual applies to both versions of same-sex attraction. As for mixing Latin and Greek roots, the English language does this all the time: Television, anyone?
"Sodogamy" is a mix of roots, too: "-gamy" is from the Greek, whereas "sodom-" is not.
Sodom is from the Greek form of the place name.
True, but the English "sodomy" is from the Latin form, "Sodoma".
Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #13 on: September 06, 2012, 08:46:35 PM »

What a queer thread.
+1
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #14 on: September 06, 2012, 08:47:04 PM »

Sodogamy? Or does this mean that lesbianism is OK? At least homosexual applies to both versions of same-sex attraction. As for mixing Latin and Greek roots, the English language does this all the time: Television, anyone?
"Sodogamy" is a mix of roots, too: "-gamy" is from the Greek, whereas "sodom-" is not.
Sodom is from the Greek form of the place name.
True, but the English "sodomy" is from the Latin form, "Sodoma".
Actually, I think from the Latin "Sodomiticum."
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,38152.msg742110.html#msg742110
« Last Edit: September 06, 2012, 08:54:40 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
dzheremi
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,027


« Reply #15 on: September 06, 2012, 08:52:52 PM »

I too prefer the word sodogamy as it describes what it is.
Let us campaign to return the word "gay" back to the good old days, and retire the word "homosexual."

What is that? The ancient Japanese art of homosexuals folding paper?

No. That's homogami. The stress is on the penultimate syllable, so they are not quite sodomophones.
Logged

yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,100


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #16 on: September 06, 2012, 09:51:02 PM »

We call the "sodomites" in our home.   We read a lot of older pioneer books to the children that talk about people being "gay" (meaning happy of course).  We didn't want to confuse the young ones.
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
akimori makoto
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Non-heretical Christian
Jurisdiction: Fully-sik-hektic archdiocese of Australia, bro
Posts: 3,126

No-one bound by fleshly pleasures is worthy ...


« Reply #17 on: September 07, 2012, 12:50:43 AM »

[...] homogami [...]

In Japanese would mean "homosexual paper".
Logged

The Episcopallian road is easy and wide, for many go through it to find destruction. lol sorry channeling Isa.
dzheremi
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,027


« Reply #18 on: September 07, 2012, 12:51:16 AM »

In English, it would be a joke.
Logged

akimori makoto
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Non-heretical Christian
Jurisdiction: Fully-sik-hektic archdiocese of Australia, bro
Posts: 3,126

No-one bound by fleshly pleasures is worthy ...


« Reply #19 on: September 07, 2012, 12:53:12 AM »

In English, it would be a joke.

I got it, I just thought you might enjoy the notion of homosexual paper.
Logged

The Episcopallian road is easy and wide, for many go through it to find destruction. lol sorry channeling Isa.
dzheremi
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,027


« Reply #20 on: September 07, 2012, 01:08:36 AM »

Oh, I most definitely do. I bet it is very fastidious and popular among somewhat neglected women.
Logged

Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox. With some feta, please.
Posts: 6,497



« Reply #21 on: September 07, 2012, 01:58:39 AM »

The worst aspect of Sodom was not homosexual acts. This was:

Quote from: Prophet Ezechiel, 16:49
Behold this was the iniquity of Sodom thy sister, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance, and the idleness of her, and of her daughters: and they did not put forth their hand to the needy, and to the poor.

So using "sodogamy" as refering to homosexuality is misguided and puts an emphasis on wrong things.
« Last Edit: September 07, 2012, 02:01:29 AM by Alpo » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #22 on: September 07, 2012, 02:16:28 AM »

The worst aspect of Sodom was not homosexual acts. This was:

Quote from: Prophet Ezechiel, 16:49
Behold this was the iniquity of Sodom thy sister, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance, and the idleness of her, and of her daughters: and they did not put forth their hand to the needy, and to the poor.

So using "sodogamy" as refering to homosexuality is misguided and puts an emphasis on wrong things.
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,5459.msg384877.html#msg384877
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox. With some feta, please.
Posts: 6,497



« Reply #23 on: September 07, 2012, 02:24:41 AM »

The worst aspect of Sodom was not homosexual acts. This was:

Quote from: Prophet Ezechiel, 16:49
Behold this was the iniquity of Sodom thy sister, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance, and the idleness of her, and of her daughters: and they did not put forth their hand to the needy, and to the poor.

So using "sodogamy" as refering to homosexuality is misguided and puts an emphasis on wrong things.
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,5459.msg384877.html#msg384877

Now you lost me. What's the point?

I'm not trying to say that homosexual acts are not sinful or that the weren't part of Sodoms sins if that's what you thought. However I'm saying that the worst aspect was generally bad treatment of the needy and the poor. As for the Lot incident, a case can be made that the worst aspect was bad treatment of guests by trying to gang rape them instead of homosexuality. Again,  I'm not saying that homosexual acts aren't sinful.
Logged
Basil 320
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,984



« Reply #24 on: September 07, 2012, 03:49:35 AM »

The word "gay" used to mean "happy."
Now that word is banned on other forums.

The word "homosexual" was coined per Father Patrick:
Quote
A new word has recently been coined . . .

Although it has not yet made its way into the English dictionary, it does deserve such admission, in my opinion.

The word is sodogamy and speaks for itself.

By the by, I am on record (for more than a half-century) as opposed to the word “homosexual.” This alleged word is what grammarians call a bastard progeny, because it conjoins alien etymological roots.

In this case, the Greek root homo and the Latin root sexus were combined to form “homosexual,” the malformed progeny of a truly unnatural union.

That is to say, “homosexual” came of joining things in a way they were never intended to be joined.


http://www.monomakhos.com/removing-metropolitan-jonah-hurt-the-american-orthodox-church/#comment-33135

I too prefer the word sodogamy as it describes what it is.
Let us campaign to return the word "gay" back to the good old days, and retire the word "homosexual."


I'm all for the proposed campaign.  It's kind of like the word "choice," replacing the words "abortion" and "murder"  But "vs." has no place here, a sodomite is a homosexual.
Logged

"...Strengthen the Orthodox Community..."
HabteSelassie
Ises and I-ity
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 3,332



« Reply #25 on: September 07, 2012, 12:11:12 PM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

We call the "sodomites" in our home.   We read a lot of older pioneer books to the children that talk about people being "gay" (meaning happy of course).  We didn't want to confuse the young ones.


That is so nice of y'all Sad

stay blessed,
habte selassie
Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,861


"My god is greater."


« Reply #26 on: September 07, 2012, 01:00:41 PM »

The fact that someone would take the time to even think of something like this, let alone put forth a serious argument about it, is saddening.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #27 on: September 07, 2012, 01:06:22 PM »

The fact that someone would take the time to even think of something like this, let alone put forth a serious argument about it, is saddening.
Are you as sad about the one who dreamed up "marriage equality" and the name "Human Rights Campaign"?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,762


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #28 on: September 07, 2012, 01:57:16 PM »

Jeremy,  I apologize for underestimating your wit.
Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

"Simply put, if you’re not willing to take what is dearest to you, whether plans or people, and kiss it goodbye, you can’t be my disciple."
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,762


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #29 on: September 07, 2012, 02:00:45 PM »

We read a lot of older pioneer books to the children that talk about people being "gay" (meaning happy of course.)

I dunno. Them pioneers got mighty lonely.
Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

"Simply put, if you’re not willing to take what is dearest to you, whether plans or people, and kiss it goodbye, you can’t be my disciple."
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,462


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #30 on: September 07, 2012, 02:04:33 PM »

We call the "sodomites" in our home.   We read a lot of older pioneer books to the children that talk about people being "gay" (meaning happy of course).  We didn't want to confuse the young ones.

You talk about sodomites in front of your kids?

I didn't even know what homosexuality was until I was well into my teens and my family certainly wasn't the type that held things back for the sake of child's ears.
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
Green_Umbrella
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 188



« Reply #31 on: September 07, 2012, 02:55:03 PM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!
We call the "sodomites" in our home.   We read a lot of older pioneer books to the children that talk about people being "gay" (meaning happy of course).  We didn't want to confuse the young ones.
That is so nice of y'all Sad
stay blessed,
habte selassie

We call them ¨sodomites¨ too. A spade is a spade.
Logged
Ionnis
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,069



« Reply #32 on: September 07, 2012, 03:01:26 PM »

Do you call Black people coloreds and negroes too?  How about people with down syndrome?  Are they mongoloids?  What about those yellow people?  I personally call "sodomites" human beings, but I can understand how that would be too progressive for some.  Now for a serious question: what do you call a homosexual who doesn't engage in sodomy or any sexual activity whatsoever? 
Logged

"If you cannot find Christ in the beggar at the church door, you will not find Him in the chalice.”  -The Divine John Chrysostom

“Till we can become divine, we must be content to be human, lest in our hurry for change we sink to something lower.” -Anthony Trollope
podkarpatska
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,018


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #33 on: September 07, 2012, 03:11:07 PM »

We speak of the 'great heresy' of phyletism all of the time - but one sin that is prominently mentioned in the New Testament - that of judging not your brothers and the casting of the first sin - not so much. Do you people think you are being 'cute' or 'funny?' I am NOT defending by any means the so-called 'gay agenda' - far from it, but this is bordering on the absurd, not to mention distasteful.
Logged
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,618


Teaching on the mountain


« Reply #34 on: September 07, 2012, 03:20:35 PM »

As much as that word "homophobia" is abused, this thread is certainly a good proof that such a thing exist. And I am calling fr. Patrick a homophobe.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #35 on: September 07, 2012, 03:39:22 PM »

As much as that word "homophobia" is abused, this thread is certainly a good proof that such a thing exist. And I am calling fr. Patrick a homophobe.
Of course you are.  His face isnt' here.

Homophobia, fear of sameness?  Usually you are accusing All Saints of that.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #36 on: September 07, 2012, 03:40:38 PM »

We call the "sodomites" in our home.   We read a lot of older pioneer books to the children that talk about people being "gay" (meaning happy of course).  We didn't want to confuse the young ones.

You talk about sodomites in front of your kids?

I didn't even know what homosexuality was until I was well into my teens and my family certainly wasn't the type that held things back for the sake of child's ears.
You didn't grow up in today's (re)education system.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
dzheremi
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,027


« Reply #37 on: September 07, 2012, 03:56:53 PM »

I don't think it's necessary to call homosexuals sodomites in order to convey the proper moral teaching on homosexuality. It's not something I would personally do, nor find acceptable around myself (to say nothing of what others decide to say around their own children, which is none of my business).

That said, there are powerful forces at play which seek to normalize acceptance of homosexuality, at the expense of Christians and others of traditional morality regarding this and other issues, who increasingly find their consciences subject to legal sanction and public excoriation. This is, at minimum, just as unacceptable as the attacks on gays that we are constantly reminded are at "epidemic" levels these days (which I very much doubt, but even one is too many) that drive the criminalization of anti-homosexual viewpoints in the West.

So why one side should consistently "win" is not obvious to me. The so-called "human rights campaign" that centers around public support for who decides to have sex with who is extremely insulting to me, living in this world as I do where people are routinely beaten to death, murdered, etc. for praying to the wrong God, or belonging to the wrong political party, etc. Is who a person decides to share their bed with REALLY on the level of these other things? I refuse to accept that. It cheapens the entire idea of what "human rights" are.
Logged

biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church
Posts: 12,661


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #38 on: September 07, 2012, 05:41:21 PM »

We speak of the 'great heresy' of phyletism all of the time - but one sin that is prominently mentioned in the New Testament - that of judging not your brothers and the casting of the first sin - not so much. Do you people think you are being 'cute' or 'funny?' I am NOT defending by any means the so-called 'gay agenda' - far from it, but this is bordering on the absurd, not to mention distasteful.

But it's okay to hate some people!  Roll Eyes
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #39 on: September 07, 2012, 05:43:51 PM »

We speak of the 'great heresy' of phyletism all of the time - but one sin that is prominently mentioned in the New Testament - that of judging not your brothers and the casting of the first sin - not so much. Do you people think you are being 'cute' or 'funny?' I am NOT defending by any means the so-called 'gay agenda' - far from it, but this is bordering on the absurd, not to mention distasteful.

But it's okay to hate some people!  Roll Eyes
That's what we are told about the likes of Cardinal Dolan.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Basil 320
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,984



« Reply #40 on: September 07, 2012, 06:17:30 PM »

Do you call Black people coloreds and negroes too?  How about people with down syndrome?  Are they mongoloids?  What about those yellow people?  I personally call "sodomites" human beings, but I can understand how that would be too progressive for some.  Now for a serious question: what do you call a homosexual who doesn't engage in sodomy or any sexual activity whatsoever? 

Better I don't answer your question.

Ah, but yes, the political correctness of the day.  It's wrong, racist in fact if I'm not mistaken,  today, to refer to Black people as "colored people," but it's ok to to refer to Black people as "people of color;" yes, very logical.   The term
"African-American" is absurd, because it describes people from a continent, not a nation, a continent composed of Caucasians and Blacks, eg. Egyptians are Africans, and Egyptians who have immigrated to America, you guessed it, are "African-Americans," but Egyptians are Caucasian.  But, no, politically correct America has assigned the term "African-American," to people of the Black race.  What ever was wrong with the proper name for this race, "Negroe," from the Spanish for "black?"


Logged

"...Strengthen the Orthodox Community..."
podkarpatska
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,018


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #41 on: September 07, 2012, 06:18:58 PM »

We speak of the 'great heresy' of phyletism all of the time - but one sin that is prominently mentioned in the New Testament - that of judging not your brothers and the casting of the first sin - not so much. Do you people think you are being 'cute' or 'funny?' I am NOT defending by any means the so-called 'gay agenda' - far from it, but this is bordering on the absurd, not to mention distasteful.

But it's okay to hate some people!  Roll Eyes
That's what we are told about the likes of Cardinal Dolan.

Huh?  Stupid comments on blogs are telling us things? (If that's the case folks reading any of our Ortho blogs could pick up some warped ideas about our faith!)  Statements by extremists among advocacy groups? Like the ones that tell their minions to 'hate' the President? Enough with hate and hatred - they are the tools of the Evil One.
Logged
Punch
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,091



« Reply #42 on: September 07, 2012, 06:44:08 PM »

Do you call Black people coloreds and negroes too? 
Yes.  Much nicer than what most people around here call them.
Quote
How about people with down syndrome?  Are they mongoloids? 
No.  I have not heard that term since DEVO sang about them. 
Quote
What about those yellow people? 
Oriental works for me.  I have never really seen one that is really yellow.  In any case, most of my "yellow" friends prefer Oriental.
Quote
I personally call "sodomites" human beings, but I can understand how that would be too progressive bleeding heart liberal (FTFY) for some.  Now for a serious question: what do you call a homosexual who doesn't engage in sodomy or any sexual activity whatsoever? 
Well, he would certainly NOT be a fudge packer.  I would probably call one as you describe a person.
Logged

Orthodox only because of God and His Russians.
Green_Umbrella
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 188



« Reply #43 on: September 07, 2012, 06:50:49 PM »

Now for a serious question: what do you call a homosexual who doesn't engage in sodomy or any sexual activity whatsoever? 

Celibate.
Logged
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,762


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #44 on: September 07, 2012, 06:56:23 PM »



We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.

Who's "we"? You and Satan?
« Last Edit: September 07, 2012, 06:57:55 PM by NicholasMyra » Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

"Simply put, if you’re not willing to take what is dearest to you, whether plans or people, and kiss it goodbye, you can’t be my disciple."
Ionnis
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,069



« Reply #45 on: September 07, 2012, 06:59:59 PM »

Do you call Black people coloreds and negroes too? 
Yes.  Much nicer than what most people around here call them.
Quote
How about people with down syndrome?  Are they mongoloids? 
No.  I have not heard that term since DEVO sang about them. 
Quote
What about those yellow people? 
Oriental works for me.  I have never really seen one that is really yellow.  In any case, most of my "yellow" friends prefer Oriental.
Quote
I personally call "sodomites" human beings, but I can understand how that would be too progressive bleeding heart liberal (FTFY) for some.  Now for a serious question: what do you call a homosexual who doesn't engage in sodomy or any sexual activity whatsoever? 
Well, he would certainly NOT be a fudge packer.  I would probably call one as you describe a person.

Good grief, Punch.  I can't tell if you are being serious or not.   And what is a "bleeding heart liberal"?
Logged

"If you cannot find Christ in the beggar at the church door, you will not find Him in the chalice.”  -The Divine John Chrysostom

“Till we can become divine, we must be content to be human, lest in our hurry for change we sink to something lower.” -Anthony Trollope
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church
Posts: 12,661


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #46 on: September 07, 2012, 07:01:42 PM »

People who aren't steaming mad at gay people all the time.  Tongue
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
podkarpatska
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,018


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #47 on: September 07, 2012, 07:07:15 PM »

We Orthodox are often accused (justly in many cases) of not being as literate with Scripture as say, our Protestant friends. Some of what is being posted on this thread confirms that - even in the case of converts who must have abjured memory of the same on conversion.

"There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." Galatians 3:28 Enough with the name calling and judging of others already.

(This goes for the nonsense being put out on the 'Brother Natanael' thread as well.)
Logged
stavros_388
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Diocese of Nelson
Posts: 1,202



« Reply #48 on: September 07, 2012, 07:41:42 PM »

We call the "sodomites" in our home.   We read a lot of older pioneer books to the children that talk about people being "gay" (meaning happy of course).  We didn't want to confuse the young ones.

You talk about sodomites in front of your kids?

I didn't even know what homosexuality was until I was well into my teens and my family certainly wasn't the type that held things back for the sake of child's ears.
You didn't grow up in today's (re)education system.

Ah, you mean the education system where we teach young people that they don't need to hate themselves? That one?
Logged

"The kingdom of heaven is virtuous life, just as the torment of hell is passionate habits." - St. Gregory of Sinai
Green_Umbrella
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 188



« Reply #49 on: September 07, 2012, 07:45:49 PM »

We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.
Who's "we"? You and Satan?

¨We¨ being the definition of a sodomite.

A person who practices sodomy

Sodomy (/ˈsɒdəmi/) is any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal.[1] The word is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible.[1] So-called "sodomy laws" in many countries criminalized not only these behaviors, but other disfavored sexual activities as well...
« Last Edit: September 07, 2012, 07:46:45 PM by Green_Umbrella » Logged
stavros_388
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Diocese of Nelson
Posts: 1,202



« Reply #50 on: September 07, 2012, 07:54:43 PM »

We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.
Who's "we"? You and Satan?

¨We¨ being the definition of a sodomite.

A person who practices sodomy

Sodomy (/ˈsɒdəmi/) is any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal.[1] The word is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible.[1] So-called "sodomy laws" in many countries criminalized not only these behaviors, but other disfavored sexual activities as well...


I guess we could call just about anyone a "sodomite", then. Because a heterosexual is probably just as likely to engage in oral and/or anal sex as anyone else.
Logged

"The kingdom of heaven is virtuous life, just as the torment of hell is passionate habits." - St. Gregory of Sinai
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church
Posts: 12,661


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #51 on: September 07, 2012, 07:57:47 PM »

Exactly. We've all seen people post here in florid encouragement that straight people should be able to do X, Y and Z in a marriage. Yet gay people are supposed to be going to hell for doing the same physical deeds.

Why is it okay for one and not another?

And what do we do about gay animals? You know, the ones in the zoo, the ones in the woods, the ones in lots of different species?

If the goats aren't going to hell, why are the people?
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #52 on: September 07, 2012, 07:57:56 PM »

We call the "sodomites" in our home.   We read a lot of older pioneer books to the children that talk about people being "gay" (meaning happy of course).  We didn't want to confuse the young ones.

You talk about sodomites in front of your kids?

I didn't even know what homosexuality was until I was well into my teens and my family certainly wasn't the type that held things back for the sake of child's ears.
You didn't grow up in today's (re)education system.

Ah, you mean the education system where we teach young people that they don't need to hate themselves? That one?
No, that one that teaches self loathing to boys, whites (especially Europeans, and worse yet Northern Europeans), heterosexuals, Christians-basically anyone not fitting in pet minority favored status.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #53 on: September 07, 2012, 08:00:24 PM »

Exactly. We've all seen people post here in florid encouragement that straight people should be able to do X, Y and Z in a marriage. Yet gay people are supposed to be going to hell for doing the same physical deeds.

Why is it okay for one and not another?
Yep. Like any adultery or fornication.

And what do we do about gay animals? You know, the ones in the zoo, the ones in the woods, the ones in lots of different species?

If the goats aren't going to hell, why are the people?
and they keep on telling us that the homosexual agenda doesn't lead to legitimation of bestiality.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Green_Umbrella
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 188



« Reply #54 on: September 07, 2012, 08:10:05 PM »

We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.
Who's "we"? You and Satan?
¨We¨ being the definition of a sodomite.
A person who practices sodomy
Sodomy (/ˈsɒdəmi/) is any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal.[1] The word is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible.[1] So-called "sodomy laws" in many countries criminalized not only these behaviors, but other disfavored sexual activities as well...
I guess we could call just about anyone a "sodomite", then. Because a heterosexual is probably just as likely to engage in oral and/or anal sex as anyone else.

I have no information on the percentage of heterosexual people who engage in sodomy . But still, a spade is a spade. A sodomite is a sodomite.
Logged
stavros_388
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Diocese of Nelson
Posts: 1,202



« Reply #55 on: September 07, 2012, 08:11:54 PM »

We call the "sodomites" in our home.   We read a lot of older pioneer books to the children that talk about people being "gay" (meaning happy of course).  We didn't want to confuse the young ones.

You talk about sodomites in front of your kids?

I didn't even know what homosexuality was until I was well into my teens and my family certainly wasn't the type that held things back for the sake of child's ears.
You didn't grow up in today's (re)education system.

Ah, you mean the education system where we teach young people that they don't need to hate themselves? That one?
No, that one that teaches self loathing to boys, whites (especially Europeans, and worse yet Northern Europeans), heterosexuals, Christians-basically anyone not fitting in pet minority favored status.

I'm not familiar with that one.
Logged

"The kingdom of heaven is virtuous life, just as the torment of hell is passionate habits." - St. Gregory of Sinai
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church
Posts: 12,661


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #56 on: September 07, 2012, 08:13:35 PM »

We call the "sodomites" in our home.   We read a lot of older pioneer books to the children that talk about people being "gay" (meaning happy of course).  We didn't want to confuse the young ones.

You talk about sodomites in front of your kids?

I didn't even know what homosexuality was until I was well into my teens and my family certainly wasn't the type that held things back for the sake of child's ears.
You didn't grow up in today's (re)education system.

Ah, you mean the education system where we teach young people that they don't need to hate themselves? That one?
No, that one that teaches self loathing to boys, whites (especially Europeans, and worse yet Northern Europeans), heterosexuals, Christians-basically anyone not fitting in pet minority favored status.

I'm not familiar with that one.

That's because it doesn't exist.
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #57 on: September 07, 2012, 08:15:53 PM »

We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.
Who's "we"? You and Satan?

¨We¨ being the definition of a sodomite.

A person who practices sodomy

Sodomy (/ˈsɒdəmi/) is any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal.[1] The word is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible.[1] So-called "sodomy laws" in many countries criminalized not only these behaviors, but other disfavored sexual activities as well...


I guess we could call just about anyone a "sodomite", then. Because a heterosexual is probably just as likely to engage in oral and/or anal sex as anyone else.
No, as the homosexual only has the oral and/or anal sex option.

I don't like the term sodomite because it lacks such precision.  ἀρσενοκοιτία, the biblical term is too specific for active male homosexual behavior, μαλακοία the biblical term is too specific for passive homosexual behavior (thought it has not come to mean masturbation, male perhaps exclusively, as I dont' recall it being used of a woman), neither explicitely including lesbianism (which is also condemned, Romans ).  Sodomite and catamite.  It is also a term the Church picked up only during the Western Captivity.  It also includes, as biro's post is going, bestiality.

There is perhaps a need for a better term, but I haven't the interest to lead that Crusade.  I like "arsenocracy" for "same sex marriage."  Sodogamy has a ring to it, but I'm not sure it doesn't need tweeking.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #58 on: September 07, 2012, 08:16:31 PM »

We call the "sodomites" in our home.   We read a lot of older pioneer books to the children that talk about people being "gay" (meaning happy of course).  We didn't want to confuse the young ones.

You talk about sodomites in front of your kids?

I didn't even know what homosexuality was until I was well into my teens and my family certainly wasn't the type that held things back for the sake of child's ears.
You didn't grow up in today's (re)education system.

Ah, you mean the education system where we teach young people that they don't need to hate themselves? That one?
No, that one that teaches self loathing to boys, whites (especially Europeans, and worse yet Northern Europeans), heterosexuals, Christians-basically anyone not fitting in pet minority favored status.

I'm not familiar with that one.

That's because it doesn't exist.
Asking you to take your eyes out and tell me their color I see.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #59 on: September 07, 2012, 08:17:56 PM »

We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.
Who's "we"? You and Satan?
¨We¨ being the definition of a sodomite.
A person who practices sodomy
Sodomy (/ˈsɒdəmi/) is any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal.[1] The word is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible.[1] So-called "sodomy laws" in many countries criminalized not only these behaviors, but other disfavored sexual activities as well...
I guess we could call just about anyone a "sodomite", then. Because a heterosexual is probably just as likely to engage in oral and/or anal sex as anyone else.

I have no information on the percentage of heterosexual people who engage in sodomy . But still, a spade is a spade. A sodomite is a sodomite.
I do, depending on your definition of Sodomy (which should be narrowed down to homosexual activity): IIRC half for oral sex, a quarter for anal sex.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church
Posts: 12,661


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #60 on: September 07, 2012, 08:20:57 PM »

We call the "sodomites" in our home.   We read a lot of older pioneer books to the children that talk about people being "gay" (meaning happy of course).  We didn't want to confuse the young ones.

You talk about sodomites in front of your kids?

I didn't even know what homosexuality was until I was well into my teens and my family certainly wasn't the type that held things back for the sake of child's ears.
You didn't grow up in today's (re)education system.

Ah, you mean the education system where we teach young people that they don't need to hate themselves? That one?
No, that one that teaches self loathing to boys, whites (especially Europeans, and worse yet Northern Europeans), heterosexuals, Christians-basically anyone not fitting in pet minority favored status.

I'm not familiar with that one.

That's because it doesn't exist.
Asking you to take your eyes out and tell me their color I see.

What the hell are you talking about?

Another snotty comeback instead of accepting that some people don't accept the bull#### you shovel. How tiresome. In all the years you've been here, haven't you had any other ideas?
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
stavros_388
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Diocese of Nelson
Posts: 1,202



« Reply #61 on: September 07, 2012, 08:22:13 PM »

We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.
Who's "we"? You and Satan?

¨We¨ being the definition of a sodomite.

A person who practices sodomy

Sodomy (/ˈsɒdəmi/) is any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal.[1] The word is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible.[1] So-called "sodomy laws" in many countries criminalized not only these behaviors, but other disfavored sexual activities as well...


I guess we could call just about anyone a "sodomite", then. Because a heterosexual is probably just as likely to engage in oral and/or anal sex as anyone else.
No, as the homosexual only has the oral and/or anal sex option.

I don't like the term sodomite because it lacks such precision.  ἀρσενοκοιτία, the biblical term is too specific for active male homosexual behavior, μαλακοία the biblical term is too specific for passive homosexual behavior (thought it has not come to mean masturbation, male perhaps exclusively, as I dont' recall it being used of a woman), neither explicitely including lesbianism (which is also condemned, Romans ).  Sodomite and catamite.  It is also a term the Church picked up only during the Western Captivity.  It also includes, as biro's post is going, bestiality.

There is perhaps a need for a better term, but I haven't the interest to lead that Crusade.  I like "arsenocracy" for "same sex marriage."  Sodogamy has a ring to it, but I'm not sure it doesn't need tweeking.

Well, get to work and brainstorm some more. Because, you know, coming up with names and titles to single out certain kinds of sinners is definitely what Christ called us to.  Tongue
Logged

"The kingdom of heaven is virtuous life, just as the torment of hell is passionate habits." - St. Gregory of Sinai
Green_Umbrella
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 188



« Reply #62 on: September 07, 2012, 08:44:29 PM »

We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.
Who's "we"? You and Satan?
¨We¨ being the definition of a sodomite.
A person who practices sodomy
Sodomy (/ˈsɒdəmi/) is any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal.[1] The word is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible.[1] So-called "sodomy laws" in many countries criminalized not only these behaviors, but other disfavored sexual activities as well...
I guess we could call just about anyone a "sodomite", then. Because a heterosexual is probably just as likely to engage in oral and/or anal sex as anyone else.
I have no information on the percentage of heterosexual people who engage in sodomy . But still, a spade is a spade. A sodomite is a sodomite.
I do, depending on your definition of Sodomy (which should be narrowed down to homosexual activity): IIRC half for oral sex, a quarter for anal sex.

I do not think sodomy is just a term for homosexual activity. Look at Romans 1:27...
And the men, instead of having normal sexual relations with women, burned with lust for each other. Men did shameful things with other men, and as a result of this sin, they suffered within themselves the penalty they deserved.

When St Paul writes the men left ¨normal sexual relations with women¨ I am thinking penile/vaginal copulation. Not  penile/anal copulation. The penile/anal copulation is just as abnormal no matter if the receiver is male or female. The organs are not made to go together...at all.  
Sodomy is sodomy. No matter if homosexual or heterosexual practices it.
« Last Edit: September 07, 2012, 08:46:21 PM by Green_Umbrella » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #63 on: September 07, 2012, 08:45:00 PM »

We call the "sodomites" in our home.   We read a lot of older pioneer books to the children that talk about people being "gay" (meaning happy of course).  We didn't want to confuse the young ones.

You talk about sodomites in front of your kids?

I didn't even know what homosexuality was until I was well into my teens and my family certainly wasn't the type that held things back for the sake of child's ears.
You didn't grow up in today's (re)education system.

Ah, you mean the education system where we teach young people that they don't need to hate themselves? That one?
No, that one that teaches self loathing to boys, whites (especially Europeans, and worse yet Northern Europeans), heterosexuals, Christians-basically anyone not fitting in pet minority favored status.

I'm not familiar with that one.

That's because it doesn't exist.
Asking you to take your eyes out and tell me their color I see.

What the hell are you talking about?

Another snotty comeback instead of accepting that some people don't accept the bull#### you shovel. How tiresome. In all the years you've been here, haven't you had any other ideas?
Quite a projecting echo you have there.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #64 on: September 07, 2012, 08:56:22 PM »

We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.
Who's "we"? You and Satan?
¨We¨ being the definition of a sodomite.
A person who practices sodomy
Sodomy (/ˈsɒdəmi/) is any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal.[1] The word is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible.[1] So-called "sodomy laws" in many countries criminalized not only these behaviors, but other disfavored sexual activities as well...
I guess we could call just about anyone a "sodomite", then. Because a heterosexual is probably just as likely to engage in oral and/or anal sex as anyone else.
I have no information on the percentage of heterosexual people who engage in sodomy . But still, a spade is a spade. A sodomite is a sodomite.
I do, depending on your definition of Sodomy (which should be narrowed down to homosexual activity): IIRC half for oral sex, a quarter for anal sex.

I do not think sodomy is just a term for homosexual activity. Look at Romans 1:27...

And the men, instead of having normal sexual relations with women, burned with lust for each other. Men did shameful things with other men, and as a result of this sin, they suffered within themselves the penalty they deserved.

When St Paul writes the men left ¨normal sexual relations with women¨ I am thinking penile/vaginal copulation. Not  penile/anal copulation. The penile/anal copulation is just as abnormal no matter if the receiver is male or female. The organs are not made to go together...at all. 
Not much on kissing I guess.

We have a thread on that, which I linked above, and several others which I think are now in the private forum, e.g.
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,38152.0.html

We have several threads on contraception which go on into this, e.g.
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,21230.msg674054/topicseen.html#msg674054
another example:
Ronald L. Conte, Jr. "Roman Catholic Theologian" has some interesting thoughts on this matter (esp. section 10)
http://www.catechism.cc/articles/marriage-bed.htm#05

His logic is flawed because he doesn't prove that oral sex, for example, is evil in it's own right. Rape is evil in it's own right, therefore, any form or amount of rape is evil. He doesn't prove this with oral sex, but assumes it, then claiming any amount of oral sex is evil. But what would make oral sex evil? Catholic teaching is because the sexual act is finished in a way that doesn't allow for life. So it's not the act of oral sex that's evil, it's the openness to life that is evil due to the reduction of the sex act for pure sexual gratification.
I think he dissects it nicely to prove his point. What he doesn't prove, is the action theory of natural law that he shares with the Vatican, gotten from Aquinas.  Which of course, is the problem.

Which is of course some twisted figment of your imagination. 

M.
Amen!

The "Natural Law" is a tricky thing.   We had a dairy farm and while I never saw either bulls or cows giving one another oral size, it was not uncommon to see bulls enjoying anal sex with one another.  It seems to be part of the Natural Law and certainly I cannot see any way to lecture them on morality and perusade them to see it as evil and contrary to the Natural Law.
Now that is just stupid, as bulls don't have a rational nature, and so there is no issue of morality with regard to how they use their bodies. Wow Fr. A. I expected better from you.... Oh wait. No I didn't.
Did you expect more of St. Gregory?  The quote trawls for Humanae Vitae always quote him, but I haven't seen them with this quote from him "Why, even unreasoning beasts know enough not to mate at certain times. To indulge in intercourse without intending children is to outrage nature, whom should take as our instructor." (The Instructor 2.10).

What's your point? St. Gregory had a mistaken view about a matter that pertains to emperical science.
You mean this matter
Quote
Clement of Alexandria



"Because of its divine institution for the propagation of man, the seed is not to be vainly ejaculated, nor is it to be damaged, nor is it to be wasted" (The Instructor of Children 2:10:91:2 [A.D. 191]).

"To have coitus other than to procreate children is to do injury to nature" (ibid., 2:10:95:3).
NIHIL OBSTAT: I have concluded that the materials
presented in this work are free of doctrinal or moral errors.
Bernadeane Carr, STL, Censor Librorum, August 10, 2004

IMPRIMATUR: In accord with 1983 CIC 827
permission to publish this work is hereby granted.
+Robert H. Brom, Bishop of San Diego, August 10, 2004
http://www.catholic.com/library/Contraception_and_Sterilization.asp

Quote
Where he was not mistaken in is that it is not proper to human nature (again, not the law of the junle) to engage in homosexual acts. Another swing and a miss for you isa.
Another misread for you Papist.

I didn't quote St. Clement on homosexual acts. Unless you are calling a man ejaculating into a woman during her unfertile period a homosexual act.
What is your point? To waste semen, is not to ejaculate it into a woman at wrong time of the month.

SS. Clement, Lactantius, Augustine and Jerome, according to the Vatican's apologists, disagree.
Quote
Clement of Alexandria
"To have coitus other than to procreate children is to do injury to nature" (The Instructor of Children , 2:10:95:3).

Lactantius
"[Some] complain of the scantiness of their means, and allege that they have not enough for bringing up more children, as though, in truth, their means were in [their] power . . . or God did not daily make the rich poor and the poor rich. Wherefore, if any one on any account of poverty shall be unable to bring up children, it is better to abstain from relations with his wife" (Divine Institutes 6:20 [A.D. 307]).

"God gave us eyes not to see and desire pleasure, but to see acts to be performed for the needs of life; so too, the genital [’generating’] part of the body, as the name itself teaches, has been received by us for no other purpose than the generation of offspring" (ibid., 6:23:18).
I guess Lactantius never urinated (although I suspect he never ejaculated either, at least in a woman. So his member served no purpose, except for entrance into the male ruling club. On him and this work here quoted by the HV apologists, the "Catholic Encyclopedia" says
Quote
The Divine Institutions" (Divinarum Institutionum Libri VII), written between 303 and 311. This the most important of all the writings of Lactantius is systematic as well as apologetic and was intended to point out the futility of pagan beliefs and to establish the reasonableness and truth of Christianity. It was the first attempt at a systematic exposition of Christian theology in Latin, and though aimed at certain pamphleteers who were aiding the persecutors by literary assaults on the Church, the work was planned on a scale sufficiently broad enough to silence all opponents. The strengths and the weakness of Lactantius are nowhere better shown than in his work. The beauty of the style, the choice and aptness of the terminology, cannot hide the author's lack of grasp on Christian principles and his almost utter ignorance of Scripture.
Ecclesiastical approbation. Nihil Obstat. October 1, 1910. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York.
To which can be added Copernicus' assessment on his astronomy, which can be said of his biology and family counseling as well
Quote
Perhaps there will be babblers who claim to be judges of astronomy although completely ignorant of the subject and, badly distorting some passage of Scripture to their purpose, will dare to find fault with my undertaking and censure it. I disregard them even to the extent of despising their criticism as unfounded. For it is not unknown that Lactantius, otherwise an illustrious writer but hardly an astronomer, speaks quite childishly about the earth's shape, when he mocks those who declared that the earth has the form of a globe. Hence scholars need not be surprised if any such persons will likewise ridicule me. Astronomy is written for astronomers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lactantius#Copernican_criticism
So too marriage for the married.

Quote
Augustine

"You [Manicheans] make your auditors adulterers of their wives when they take care lest the women with whom they copulate conceive. They take wives according to the laws of matrimony by tablets announcing that the marriage is contracted to procreate children; and then, fearing because of your law [against childbearing] . . . they copulate in a shameful union only to satisfy lust for their wives. They are unwilling to have children, on whose account alone marriages are made. How is it, then, that you are not those prohibiting marriage, as the apostle predicted of you so long ago [1 Tim. 4:1–4], when you try to take from marriage what marriage is? When this is taken away, husbands are shameful lovers, wives are harlots, bridal chambers are brothels, fathers-in-law are pimps" (Against Faustus 15:7 [A.D. 400]).

"For necessary sexual intercourse for begetting [children] is alone worthy of marriage. But that which goes beyond this necessity no longer follows reason but lust. And yet it pertains to the character of marriage . . . to yield it to the partner lest by fornication the other sin damnably [through adultery]. . . . [T]hey [must] not turn away from them the mercy of God . . . by changing the natural use into that which is against nature, which is more damnable when it is done in the case of husband or wife. For, whereas that natural use, when it pass beyond the compact of marriage, that is, beyond the necessity of begetting [children], is pardonable in the case of a wife, damnable in the case of a harlot; that which is against nature is execrable when done in the case of a harlot, but more execrable in the case of a wife. Of so great power is the ordinance of the Creator, and the order of creation, that . . . when the man shall wish to use a body part of the wife not allowed for this purpose [orally or anally consummated sex], the wife is more shameful, if she suffer it to take place in her own case, than if in the case of another woman" (The Good of Marriage 11–12 [A.D. 401]).

Jerome

"But I wonder why he [the heretic Jovinianus] set Judah and Tamar before us for an example, unless perchance even harlots give him pleasure; or Onan, who was slain because he grudged his brother seed. Does he imagine that we approve of any sexual intercourse except for the procreation of children?" (Against Jovinian 1:19 [A.D. 393]).


NIHIL OBSTAT: I have concluded that the materials
presented in this work are free of doctrinal or moral errors.
Bernadeane Carr, STL, Censor Librorum, August 10, 2004

IMPRIMATUR: In accord with 1983 CIC 827
permission to publish this work is hereby granted.
+Robert H. Brom, Bishop of San Diego, August 10, 2004

Quote
Semen exists to be ejaculated into a woman.

Then why the opposition of the Vatican to artificial insemenation?

Quote
That is its nature.

Then it wouldn't come out in nocturnal emissions, nor be broken down and absorbed if not ejaculate (into a woman or otherwise).

Quote
Vainly ejaculating would be to masterbate or use a condom,
or a infertile/barren woman. In fact, since 16 million -1 are expended in a conception, even there most are vainly ejaculated, no matter how much they contribute to the success of the one.

Quote
or to have sexual relations without ejaculating in the woman. Of course, I am sure you know this.


I know that there is more to a relationship than treating the man like a sperm donor with an insemenination catheter.

Quote
]The problem is that you are so attached your selfish expressions of sexuality.
Rather presumptious of you to assUme my private life.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #65 on: September 07, 2012, 09:21:22 PM »

We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.
Who's "we"? You and Satan?

¨We¨ being the definition of a sodomite.

A person who practices sodomy

Sodomy (/ˈsɒdəmi/) is any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal.[1] The word is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible.[1] So-called "sodomy laws" in many countries criminalized not only these behaviors, but other disfavored sexual activities as well...


I guess we could call just about anyone a "sodomite", then. Because a heterosexual is probably just as likely to engage in oral and/or anal sex as anyone else.
No, as the homosexual only has the oral and/or anal sex option.

I don't like the term sodomite because it lacks such precision.  ἀρσενοκοιτία, the biblical term is too specific for active male homosexual behavior, μαλακοία the biblical term is too specific for passive homosexual behavior (thought it has not come to mean masturbation, male perhaps exclusively, as I dont' recall it being used of a woman), neither explicitely including lesbianism (which is also condemned, Romans ).  Sodomite and catamite.  It is also a term the Church picked up only during the Western Captivity.  It also includes, as biro's post is going, bestiality.

There is perhaps a need for a better term, but I haven't the interest to lead that Crusade.  I like "arsenocracy" for "same sex marriage."  Sodogamy has a ring to it, but I'm not sure it doesn't need tweeking.

Well, get to work and brainstorm some more. Because, you know, coming up with names and titles to single out certain kinds of sinners is definitely what Christ called us to.  Tongue
He certainly didn't call us to give His stamp of approval.

St. Paul doesn't talk of hell. Gentle Jesus talks about it quite a bit, even on the Mount.

Btw, what part of "I haven't the interest" did you miss?
« Last Edit: September 07, 2012, 09:23:55 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
podkarpatska
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,018


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #66 on: September 07, 2012, 09:33:13 PM »

I would hope we could all temper our hostility in this matter.

Assume 'arguendo' that at some point in the future, the world's scientific consensus is solidified that our genetics predetermine our sexuality. Again - assume 'arguendo' - I am NOT advocating anything here - just positing an argument.

If such a hypothesis is ultimately generally accepted by the test of time and the scientific method to be the case - how should we react?

After all, regardless of whether one is a literalist in terms of creation, a creationist or one who is able to view evolution and natural selection as being within the wisdom of God's knowledge, we all believe that humans are created in God's image -necessarily including our DNA. After all - and again I am positing a hypothetical here friends - throughout the history of the Church many beliefs existed about the natural world and the universe which were once fervently held as revealed truth and are no longer viewed as such - for example, heliocentrism, disease as a 'payback' for the sins of the suffering, children born with birth defects on account of their parent's sinful actions, the divine rule of Kings and Princes and so on.... ( I know, some of you still believe this stuff.....) How will we react if we learn that as part of God's plan of creation, he did 'pre-program' the sexual preferences of some of His children in a manner not consistent with the rules and teachings of the Old Testament and certainly not within the New Testament's definition and teaching on marriage as being between a man a woman?  

I am not questioning the Church's moral teaching here, but rather the attitudes that many exhude regarding the nature of homosexual human beings. No one questions that a man born with a high libido is bound by the same moral constraints as man with a lower sex drive - I suspect that DNA may determine that as well and I understand that those born with a predisposition to sexual attraction to members of the same sex are bound by those same constraints. It is the constant obsession with this topic that many have and the hostility and snarkiness which is displayed that is troubling.

Christ rebuked those who questioned his association with the much married Samaritan woman. Likewise he rebuked those who questioned the use of precious oil on His feet by the hand of woman, Mary Magdalene. He reserved his greatest anger for those who were hypocrites and those who exhalted themselves at the expense of others. It seems to me that calming down and taking a deep breath is in order.
« Last Edit: September 07, 2012, 09:38:12 PM by podkarpatska » Logged
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 7,865


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #67 on: September 07, 2012, 10:15:41 PM »

We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.
Who's "we"? You and Satan?

¨We¨ being the definition of a sodomite.

A person who practices sodomy

Sodomy (/ˈsɒdəmi/) is any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal.[1] The word is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible.[1] So-called "sodomy laws" in many countries criminalized not only these behaviors, but other disfavored sexual activities as well...


I guess we could call just about anyone a "sodomite", then. Because a heterosexual is probably just as likely to engage in oral and/or anal sex as anyone else.

Really? I know quite a few heterosexuals, happily married, who would never engage in oral and/or anal sex. They consider that disgusting and SINFUL.
« Last Edit: September 07, 2012, 10:16:02 PM by Maria » Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
Punch
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,091



« Reply #68 on: September 07, 2012, 10:23:05 PM »

Do you call Black people coloreds and negroes too? 
Yes.  Much nicer than what most people around here call them.
Quote
How about people with down syndrome?  Are they mongoloids? 
No.  I have not heard that term since DEVO sang about them. 
Quote
What about those yellow people? 
Oriental works for me.  I have never really seen one that is really yellow.  In any case, most of my "yellow" friends prefer Oriental.
Quote
I personally call "sodomites" human beings, but I can understand how that would be too progressive bleeding heart liberal (FTFY) for some.  Now for a serious question: what do you call a homosexual who doesn't engage in sodomy or any sexual activity whatsoever? 
Well, he would certainly NOT be a fudge packer.  I would probably call one as you describe a person.

Good grief, Punch.  I can't tell if you are being serious or not.   And what is a "bleeding heart liberal"?

Only half.  A bleeding heart liberal is what is not called a progressive.  Just like a conservative is now hateful.  You know, definition of the day.
Logged

Orthodox only because of God and His Russians.
Green_Umbrella
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 188



« Reply #69 on: September 07, 2012, 10:25:31 PM »

We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.
Who's "we"? You and Satan?

¨We¨ being the definition of a sodomite.

A person who practices sodomy

Sodomy (/ˈsɒdəmi/) is any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal.[1] The word is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible.[1] So-called "sodomy laws" in many countries criminalized not only these behaviors, but other disfavored sexual activities as well...


I guess we could call just about anyone a "sodomite", then. Because a heterosexual is probably just as likely to engage in oral and/or anal sex as anyone else.

Really? I know quite a few heterosexuals, happily married, who would never engage in oral and/or anal sex. They consider that disgusting and SINFUL.

Me too.
Logged
Punch
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,091



« Reply #70 on: September 07, 2012, 10:38:52 PM »

We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.
Who's "we"? You and Satan?

¨We¨ being the definition of a sodomite.

A person who practices sodomy

Sodomy (/ˈsɒdəmi/) is any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal.[1] The word is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible.[1] So-called "sodomy laws" in many countries criminalized not only these behaviors, but other disfavored sexual activities as well...


I guess we could call just about anyone a "sodomite", then. Because a heterosexual is probably just as likely to engage in oral and/or anal sex as anyone else.

Really? I know quite a few heterosexuals, happily married, who would never engage in oral and/or anal sex. They consider that disgusting and SINFUL.

Me too.

Yes.  Anal does not exite me.
Logged

Orthodox only because of God and His Russians.
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 7,865


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #71 on: September 07, 2012, 10:50:03 PM »

We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.
Who's "we"? You and Satan?

¨We¨ being the definition of a sodomite.

A person who practices sodomy

Sodomy (/ˈsɒdəmi/) is any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal.[1] The word is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible.[1] So-called "sodomy laws" in many countries criminalized not only these behaviors, but other disfavored sexual activities as well...


I guess we could call just about anyone a "sodomite", then. Because a heterosexual is probably just as likely to engage in oral and/or anal sex as anyone else.

Really? I know quite a few heterosexuals, happily married, who would never engage in oral and/or anal sex. They consider that disgusting and SINFUL.

Me too.

Yes.  Anal does not exite me.

I agree. Wallowing in filth is the behavior of pigs and sodomites, not decent human beings created in the image and likeness of God.
Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
Ionnis
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,069



« Reply #72 on: September 07, 2012, 11:15:03 PM »

The caustic comments, whether in jest or serious, hurt a lot of people.  People feel justified in their comments because somehow some sinners are less worthy of compassion and understanding.  It seems to me that some people think that compassion and understanding are somehow passions to be overcome.  Some people act as if compassion and understanding means that one is liberal and is willing to excuse/justify sinful behavior.  I just don't understand that.  Our Lord in the midst of His brutal, but saving, Passion sought to pardon the transgressions of those who murdered Him.  He was nothing but compassionate.

There are many in the Church who struggle with homosexuality.  They often feel alone.  They struggle to remain celibate, something that verges on an impossibility in this day and age, but is even more difficult when all they hear is caustic, mean-spirited comments from people in the Church, those very people who are essential in ensuring their salvation.  The celibate person cannot endure this yoke without his or her brothers and sisters in the Faith and most do not endure.  They feel isolated, completely alone.  Some here will say that they aren't speaking about celibate homosexuals, but only sexually active ones, but for those who struggle, that doesn't mean much.  The memories of teasing and taunting they endured from their peers and adults growing up comes  whirling back and hits like a fist.  For many, it is a reminder of how different they are and alone and a reminder to not hold out hope for a community that will support them. 

Many of your brothers and sisters who struggle with this issue have little support from anyone.  The gay community pities them and tries to "enlighten" them and/or holds them in absolute contempt and the Christian community doesn't seem to know how/is uncomfortable with/doesn't want to support those who struggle and/or holds them in absolute contempt. 

It is moments like these when the world seems most dark.  When those evil thoughts that the devil tries to put into the minds of those who struggle, those thoughts they constantly battle against, find their voice in the servants of Christ. 

I won't be returning to this thread and not even sure if I can return to this forum.  I'm not sure I could bear any of the responses I might get.

Lord, have mercy on your servants.

Logged

"If you cannot find Christ in the beggar at the church door, you will not find Him in the chalice.”  -The Divine John Chrysostom

“Till we can become divine, we must be content to be human, lest in our hurry for change we sink to something lower.” -Anthony Trollope
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,618


Teaching on the mountain


« Reply #73 on: September 07, 2012, 11:43:29 PM »

Comm'on Ionnis, just ignore idiots like the one's that come with stupid puns ("sodogamy")  and the idiots that think the idiotic pun is worth sharing .
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #74 on: September 07, 2012, 11:48:15 PM »

Comm'on Ionnis, just ignore idiots like the one's that come with stupid puns ("sodogamy")  and the idiots that think the idiotic pun is worth sharing .
And some idiots want to contribute 2 cents of whining.
« Last Edit: September 08, 2012, 12:05:10 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #75 on: September 07, 2012, 11:57:36 PM »

We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.
Who's "we"? You and Satan?

¨We¨ being the definition of a sodomite.

A person who practices sodomy

Sodomy (/ˈsɒdəmi/) is any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal.[1] The word is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible.[1] So-called "sodomy laws" in many countries criminalized not only these behaviors, but other disfavored sexual activities as well...


I guess we could call just about anyone a "sodomite", then. Because a heterosexual is probably just as likely to engage in oral and/or anal sex as anyone else.

Really? I know quite a few heterosexuals, happily married, who would never engage in oral and/or anal sex.

And you verified this how?

They consider that disgusting and SINFUL.
I hope they are happy together.  Like I said, its 50%/25%, so that leaves at least 25% (I could assume that the 50% for oral would include 25% for anal, but I don't assUme) for you to know quite a few heterosexual married (redundant) couples, although their disgust should be of interest only to each other.

As for SINFUL, that's another issue.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #76 on: September 08, 2012, 12:02:28 AM »

We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.
Who's "we"? You and Satan?

¨We¨ being the definition of a sodomite.

A person who practices sodomy

Sodomy (/ˈsɒdəmi/) is any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal.[1] The word is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible.[1] So-called "sodomy laws" in many countries criminalized not only these behaviors, but other disfavored sexual activities as well...


I guess we could call just about anyone a "sodomite", then. Because a heterosexual is probably just as likely to engage in oral and/or anal sex as anyone else.

Really? I know quite a few heterosexuals, happily married, who would never engage in oral and/or anal sex. They consider that disgusting and SINFUL.

Me too.

Yes.  Anal does not exite me.

I agree. Wallowing in filth is the behavior of pigs and sodomites, not decent human beings created in the image and likeness of God.
I have heard man on top, husband's penis entering wife's vagina during fertile period, eyes shut, no kissing, lights out, get it over with as quickly as posssible sex so described.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,618


Teaching on the mountain


« Reply #77 on: September 08, 2012, 12:16:18 AM »

Quote
As for SINFUL, that's another issue.
There is no discussion that traditionally, it was considered sinful but of course, that there are some touchstonistas out there that wanna be  both in good standing in the church and also do their wives in the anus it becomes a sacred rite now. hopefully the great panorthodox council will revise the marriage rite including a blessing for anal play among pious neocoin couples.
Logged
SolEX01
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 10,986


WWW
« Reply #78 on: September 08, 2012, 12:31:45 AM »

We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.
Who's "we"? You and Satan?

¨We¨ being the definition of a sodomite.

A person who practices sodomy

Sodomy (/ˈsɒdəmi/) is any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal.[1] The word is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible.[1] So-called "sodomy laws" in many countries criminalized not only these behaviors, but other disfavored sexual activities as well...


I guess we could call just about anyone a "sodomite", then. Because a heterosexual is probably just as likely to engage in oral and/or anal sex as anyone else.

Really? I know quite a few heterosexuals, happily married, who would never engage in oral and/or anal sex. They consider that disgusting and SINFUL.

Me too.

Yes.  Anal does not exite me.

I agree. Wallowing in filth is the behavior of pigs and sodomites, not decent human beings created in the image and likeness of God.
I have heard man on top, husband's penis entering wife's vagina during fertile period, eyes shut, no kissing, lights out, get it over with as quickly as posssible sex so described.

But for some people, that is good enough.  We can't (or realistically, shouldn't) exalt our own sex lives above our neighbor's.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #79 on: September 08, 2012, 12:33:02 AM »

Quote
As for SINFUL, that's another issue.
There is no discussion that traditionally, it was considered sinful but of course, that there are some touchstonistas out there that wanna be  both in good standing in the church and also do their wives in the anus it becomes a sacred rite now. hopefully the great panorthodox council will revise the marriage rite including a blessing for anal play among pious neocoin couples.
Care to back up your nonsense with a quote from someone in Touchstone?  Or are you just prattling on out of ignorance as usual.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #80 on: September 08, 2012, 12:33:54 AM »

We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.
Who's "we"? You and Satan?

¨We¨ being the definition of a sodomite.

A person who practices sodomy

Sodomy (/ˈsɒdəmi/) is any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal.[1] The word is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible.[1] So-called "sodomy laws" in many countries criminalized not only these behaviors, but other disfavored sexual activities as well...


I guess we could call just about anyone a "sodomite", then. Because a heterosexual is probably just as likely to engage in oral and/or anal sex as anyone else.

Really? I know quite a few heterosexuals, happily married, who would never engage in oral and/or anal sex. They consider that disgusting and SINFUL.

Me too.

Yes.  Anal does not exite me.

I agree. Wallowing in filth is the behavior of pigs and sodomites, not decent human beings created in the image and likeness of God.
I have heard man on top, husband's penis entering wife's vagina during fertile period, eyes shut, no kissing, lights out, get it over with as quickly as posssible sex so described.

But for some people, that is good enough.  We can't (or realistically, shouldn't) exalt our own sex lives above our neighbor's.
Since I shouldn't, and don't, sleep with my neighbor's wife, I don't care what they do.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
SolEX01
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 10,986


WWW
« Reply #81 on: September 08, 2012, 01:07:38 AM »

We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.
Who's "we"? You and Satan?

¨We¨ being the definition of a sodomite.

A person who practices sodomy

Sodomy (/ˈsɒdəmi/) is any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal.[1] The word is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible.[1] So-called "sodomy laws" in many countries criminalized not only these behaviors, but other disfavored sexual activities as well...


I guess we could call just about anyone a "sodomite", then. Because a heterosexual is probably just as likely to engage in oral and/or anal sex as anyone else.

Really? I know quite a few heterosexuals, happily married, who would never engage in oral and/or anal sex. They consider that disgusting and SINFUL.

Me too.

Yes.  Anal does not exite me.

I agree. Wallowing in filth is the behavior of pigs and sodomites, not decent human beings created in the image and likeness of God.
I have heard man on top, husband's penis entering wife's vagina during fertile period, eyes shut, no kissing, lights out, get it over with as quickly as posssible sex so described.

But for some people, that is good enough.  We can't (or realistically, shouldn't) exalt our own sex lives above our neighbor's.
Since I shouldn't, and don't, sleep with my neighbor's wife, I don't care what they do.

Why be explicit about it if you don't care what they do?
Logged
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 7,865


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #82 on: September 08, 2012, 01:17:35 AM »

We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.
Who's "we"? You and Satan?

¨We¨ being the definition of a sodomite.

A person who practices sodomy

Sodomy (/ˈsɒdəmi/) is any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal.[1] The word is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible.[1] So-called "sodomy laws" in many countries criminalized not only these behaviors, but other disfavored sexual activities as well...


I guess we could call just about anyone a "sodomite", then. Because a heterosexual is probably just as likely to engage in oral and/or anal sex as anyone else.

Really? I know quite a few heterosexuals, happily married, who would never engage in oral and/or anal sex. They consider that disgusting and SINFUL.

Me too.

Yes.  Anal does not exite me.

I agree. Wallowing in filth is the behavior of pigs and sodomites, not decent human beings created in the image and likeness of God.
I have heard man on top, husband's penis entering wife's vagina during fertile period, eyes shut, no kissing, lights out, get it over with as quickly as posssible sex so described.

Sheesh! that sounds like rape, not marital love.
Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #83 on: September 08, 2012, 01:21:22 AM »

We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.
Who's "we"? You and Satan?

¨We¨ being the definition of a sodomite.

A person who practices sodomy

Sodomy (/ˈsɒdəmi/) is any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal.[1] The word is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible.[1] So-called "sodomy laws" in many countries criminalized not only these behaviors, but other disfavored sexual activities as well...


I guess we could call just about anyone a "sodomite", then. Because a heterosexual is probably just as likely to engage in oral and/or anal sex as anyone else.

Really? I know quite a few heterosexuals, happily married, who would never engage in oral and/or anal sex. They consider that disgusting and SINFUL.

Me too.

Yes.  Anal does not exite me.

I agree. Wallowing in filth is the behavior of pigs and sodomites, not decent human beings created in the image and likeness of God.
I have heard man on top, husband's penis entering wife's vagina during fertile period, eyes shut, no kissing, lights out, get it over with as quickly as posssible sex so described.

But for some people, that is good enough.  We can't (or realistically, shouldn't) exalt our own sex lives above our neighbor's.
Since I shouldn't, and don't, sleep with my neighbor's wife, I don't care what they do.

Why be explicit about it if you don't care what they do?

Maria seems to find it important.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #84 on: September 08, 2012, 01:23:41 AM »

We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.
Who's "we"? You and Satan?

¨We¨ being the definition of a sodomite.

A person who practices sodomy

Sodomy (/ˈsɒdəmi/) is any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal.[1] The word is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible.[1] So-called "sodomy laws" in many countries criminalized not only these behaviors, but other disfavored sexual activities as well...


I guess we could call just about anyone a "sodomite", then. Because a heterosexual is probably just as likely to engage in oral and/or anal sex as anyone else.

Really? I know quite a few heterosexuals, happily married, who would never engage in oral and/or anal sex. They consider that disgusting and SINFUL.

Me too.

Yes.  Anal does not exite me.

I agree. Wallowing in filth is the behavior of pigs and sodomites, not decent human beings created in the image and likeness of God.
I have heard man on top, husband's penis entering wife's vagina during fertile period, eyes shut, no kissing, lights out, get it over with as quickly as posssible sex so described.

Sheesh! that sounds like rape, not marital love.
Now, now...they find it the only behavior, when it becomes necessary, for decent human beings created in the image and likeness of God.  Anything else is wallowing in filth of pigs and sodomites.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
SolEX01
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 10,986


WWW
« Reply #85 on: September 08, 2012, 01:31:38 AM »

We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.
Who's "we"? You and Satan?

¨We¨ being the definition of a sodomite.

A person who practices sodomy

Sodomy (/ˈsɒdəmi/) is any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal.[1] The word is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible.[1] So-called "sodomy laws" in many countries criminalized not only these behaviors, but other disfavored sexual activities as well...


I guess we could call just about anyone a "sodomite", then. Because a heterosexual is probably just as likely to engage in oral and/or anal sex as anyone else.

Really? I know quite a few heterosexuals, happily married, who would never engage in oral and/or anal sex. They consider that disgusting and SINFUL.

Me too.

Yes.  Anal does not exite me.

I agree. Wallowing in filth is the behavior of pigs and sodomites, not decent human beings created in the image and likeness of God.
I have heard man on top, husband's penis entering wife's vagina during fertile period, eyes shut, no kissing, lights out, get it over with as quickly as posssible sex so described.

But for some people, that is good enough.  We can't (or realistically, shouldn't) exalt our own sex lives above our neighbor's.
Since I shouldn't, and don't, sleep with my neighbor's wife, I don't care what they do.

Why be explicit about it if you don't care what they do?

Maria seems to find it important.

Let her have her judgment by calling us pigs and sodomites.  We don't sit in judgment of Maria.
Logged
SolEX01
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 10,986


WWW
« Reply #86 on: September 08, 2012, 01:34:01 AM »

We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.
Who's "we"? You and Satan?

¨We¨ being the definition of a sodomite.

A person who practices sodomy

Sodomy (/ˈsɒdəmi/) is any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal.[1] The word is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible.[1] So-called "sodomy laws" in many countries criminalized not only these behaviors, but other disfavored sexual activities as well...


I guess we could call just about anyone a "sodomite", then. Because a heterosexual is probably just as likely to engage in oral and/or anal sex as anyone else.

Really? I know quite a few heterosexuals, happily married, who would never engage in oral and/or anal sex. They consider that disgusting and SINFUL.

Me too.

Yes.  Anal does not exite me.

I agree. Wallowing in filth is the behavior of pigs and sodomites, not decent human beings created in the image and likeness of God.
I have heard man on top, husband's penis entering wife's vagina during fertile period, eyes shut, no kissing, lights out, get it over with as quickly as posssible sex so described.

Sheesh! that sounds like rape, not marital love.

Where do babies come from?  God? The stork brings them?  A pipette with the man's seed is injected into the woman's egg in a petri dish?
Logged
Green_Umbrella
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 188



« Reply #87 on: September 08, 2012, 01:35:35 AM »

Quote
As for SINFUL, that's another issue.
There is no discussion that traditionally, it was considered sinful but of course, that there are some touchstonistas out there that wanna be  both in good standing in the church and also do their wives in the anus it becomes a sacred rite now. hopefully the great panorthodox council will revise the marriage rite including a blessing for anal play among pious neocoin couples.

There is no ¨was¨ to it. Sodomy is sin. You can sugar coat it and candy wrap it all you like but the fact remains. Sodomy is sin.
St. Paul “Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves ...They Shall Not Inherit The Kingdom of God
Sinners need to repent. And that includes men who used their wives anus.  Huh    
« Last Edit: September 08, 2012, 01:36:07 AM by Green_Umbrella » Logged
SolEX01
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 10,986


WWW
« Reply #88 on: September 08, 2012, 01:42:00 AM »

Quote
As for SINFUL, that's another issue.
There is no discussion that traditionally, it was considered sinful but of course, that there are some touchstonistas out there that wanna be  both in good standing in the church and also do their wives in the anus it becomes a sacred rite now. hopefully the great panorthodox council will revise the marriage rite including a blessing for anal play among pious neocoin couples.

There is no ¨was¨ to it. Sodomy is sin. You can sugar coat it and candy wrap it all you like but the fact remains. Sodomy is sin.
St. Paul “Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves ...They Shall Not Inherit The Kingdom of God
Sinners need to repent. And that includes men who used their wives anus.  Huh    

And who are you to call sinners to repentance?  What about the woman, should she repent for having her anus used by the man?
Logged
Jonathan Gress
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 3,016


« Reply #89 on: September 08, 2012, 01:49:20 AM »

I don't recall advocates of oral or anal sex ever demonstrating patristic support for their position. It seems to be based on the idea that since sodomy is a "Western" term (not sure what the evidence for this assertion is, either), therefore oral and anal sex are permitted within marriage. This is not what my bishop teaches. Which bishops teach that it is permitted? Do they provide patristic authority?
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #90 on: September 08, 2012, 01:50:35 AM »

Quote
As for SINFUL, that's another issue.
There is no discussion that traditionally, it was considered sinful but of course, that there are some touchstonistas out there that wanna be  both in good standing in the church and also do their wives in the anus it becomes a sacred rite now. hopefully the great panorthodox council will revise the marriage rite including a blessing for anal play among pious neocoin couples.

There is no ¨was¨ to it. Sodomy is sin. You can sugar coat it and candy wrap it all you like but the fact remains. Sodomy is sin.
St. Paul “Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves ...They Shall Not Inherit The Kingdom of God
Sinners need to repent. And that includes men who used their wives anus.  Huh    
ἢ οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι ἄδικοι βασιλείαν Θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσι; μὴ πλανᾶσθε· οὔτε πόρνοι οὔτε εἰδωλολάτραι οὔτε μοιχοὶ οὔτε μαλακοὶ οὔτε ἀρσενοκοῖται
No sodomites there.

So, you will have to a) define your term "sodomy" and b) establish its Orthodoxy (as it is coined by the scholastic Damian in the 12th century, and doesn't appear in any Orthodox context well into the Western Captivity, in the Westernized law code of Peter) to argue your point.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #91 on: September 08, 2012, 02:13:25 AM »

I don't recall advocates of oral or anal sex ever demonstrating patristic support for their position.
I don't recall detractors of oral or anal sex ever demonstrating patristic support for any sexual position.  It seems that the urge to denigrate sex in general brought with it the urge to go into particulars, which those Fathers who spoke highly of marriage didn't seem to feel the need to go into.

It seems to be based on the idea that since sodomy is a "Western" term (not sure what the evidence for this assertion is, either)
It doesn't appear until Peter Damian (a saint and doctor of the Vatican)'s Liber Gomorrhianus, which condemned-in detail-various homosexual acts among the clergy.  He also had this to say to the wives of priests (whose marriages he held as void and nullifying their husband's orders and ministrations):
Quote
I address myself to you, you darlings of the priests, you tit-bits of the devil, poisons of the minds, daggers of souls, aconite of drinkers, bane of eaters, stuff of sin, occasion of destruction. To you I turn, I say , you whores of the ancient enemy, you hoopoes, vampires, bats, leeches, wolves. Come and hear me, you whores, you beds for fat swine to wallow in,
I agree. Wallowing in filth is the behavior of pigs and sodomites, not decent human beings created in the image and likeness of God.
Quote
you bedrooms of unclean spirits, you nymphs, you sirens, you harpies, you Dianas, you wicked tigresses, you furious vipers...
http://books.google.com/books?id=9MBnbFg-jJgC&pg=PA261&lpg=PA261&dq=%22occasion+of+destruction.+To+you+I+turn,+I+say,%22&source=bl&ots=K9oTXolNaN&sig=BMjKncJFcnqRNREMgvWOm0hV_yM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=FeBKUJaOAdOK2QW8sIAw&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22occasion%20of%20destruction.%20To%20you%20I%20turn%2C%20I%20say%2C%22&f=false
and when that failed, he castrated the priest.

therefore oral and anal sex are permitted within marriage. This is not what my bishop teaches.

I can't remember. Did we have a discussion about your bishop being in the Orthodox diptychs of the Catholic Church?

Which bishops teach that it is permitted? Do they provide patristic authority?
Like I said, most who respect the marital bed don't go into what goes on there.
« Last Edit: September 08, 2012, 02:17:21 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Jonathan Gress
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 3,016


« Reply #92 on: September 08, 2012, 02:25:28 AM »

I don't recall advocates of oral or anal sex ever demonstrating patristic support for their position.
I don't recall detractors of oral or anal sex ever demonstrating patristic support for any sexual position.  It seems that the urge to denigrate sex in general brought with it the urge to go into particulars, which those Fathers who spoke highly of marriage didn't seem to feel the need to go into.

It seems to be based on the idea that since sodomy is a "Western" term (not sure what the evidence for this assertion is, either)
It doesn't appear until Peter Damian (a saint and doctor of the Vatican)'s Liber Gomorrhianus, which condemned-in detail-various homosexual acts among the clergy.  He also had this to say to the wives of priests (whose marriages he held as void and nullifying their husband's orders and ministrations):
Quote
I address myself to you, you darlings of the priests, you tit-bits of the devil, poisons of the minds, daggers of souls, aconite of drinkers, bane of eaters, stuff of sin, occasion of destruction. To you I turn, I say , you whores of the ancient enemy, you hoopoes, vampires, bats, leeches, wolves. Come and hear me, you whores, you beds for fat swine to wallow in,
I agree. Wallowing in filth is the behavior of pigs and sodomites, not decent human beings created in the image and likeness of God.
Quote
you bedrooms of unclean spirits, you nymphs, you sirens, you harpies, you Dianas, you wicked tigresses, you furious vipers...
http://books.google.com/books?id=9MBnbFg-jJgC&pg=PA261&lpg=PA261&dq=%22occasion+of+destruction.+To+you+I+turn,+I+say,%22&source=bl&ots=K9oTXolNaN&sig=BMjKncJFcnqRNREMgvWOm0hV_yM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=FeBKUJaOAdOK2QW8sIAw&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22occasion%20of%20destruction.%20To%20you%20I%20turn%2C%20I%20say%2C%22&f=false
and when that failed, he castrated the priest.

therefore oral and anal sex are permitted within marriage. This is not what my bishop teaches.

I can't remember. Did we have a discussion about your bishop being in the Orthodox diptychs of the Catholic Church?

Which bishops teach that it is permitted? Do they provide patristic authority?
Like I said, most who respect the marital bed don't go into what goes on there.

My bishop is an authority on Orthodox teaching. You are not, so provide some support for your position from someone that has such authority.
Logged
Green_Umbrella
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 188



« Reply #93 on: September 08, 2012, 02:33:26 AM »

Quote
As for SINFUL, that's another issue.
There is no discussion that traditionally, it was considered sinful but of course, that there are some touchstonistas out there that wanna be  both in good standing in the church and also do their wives in the anus it becomes a sacred rite now. hopefully the great panorthodox council will revise the marriage rite including a blessing for anal play among pious neocoin couples.
There is no ¨was¨ to it. Sodomy is sin. You can sugar coat it and candy wrap it all you like but the fact remains. Sodomy is sin.
St. Paul “Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves ...They Shall Not Inherit The Kingdom of God
Sinners need to repent. And that includes men who used their wives anus.  Huh    
ἢ οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι ἄδικοι βασιλείαν Θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσι; μὴ πλανᾶσθε· οὔτε πόρνοι οὔτε εἰδωλολάτραι οὔτε μοιχοὶ οὔτε μαλακοὶ οὔτε ἀρσενοκοῖται
No sodomites there.
So, you will have to a) define your term "sodomy" and b) establish its Orthodoxy (as it is coined by the scholastic Damian in the 12th century, and doesn't appear in any Orthodox context well into the Western Captivity, in the Westernized law code of Peter) to argue your point.

I have already given a definition of sodomy on this thread. There is no need for another. You can look in any dictionary, they are all pretty much the same. I have also given scripture showing the act of sodomy clearly to be a sin. If you do not like the fact that sodomy is considered a sin in Christianity this is your problem. Not mine. 
Logged
Green_Umbrella
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 188



« Reply #94 on: September 08, 2012, 02:35:24 AM »

Quote
As for SINFUL, that's another issue.
There is no discussion that traditionally, it was considered sinful but of course, that there are some touchstonistas out there that wanna be  both in good standing in the church and also do their wives in the anus it becomes a sacred rite now. hopefully the great panorthodox council will revise the marriage rite including a blessing for anal play among pious neocoin couples.
There is no ¨was¨ to it. Sodomy is sin. You can sugar coat it and candy wrap it all you like but the fact remains. Sodomy is sin.
St. Paul “Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves ...They Shall Not Inherit The Kingdom of God
Sinners need to repent. And that includes men who used their wives anus.  Huh    
And who are you to call sinners to repentance?  What about the woman, should she repent for having her anus used by the man?

Who are you to ask stupid questions?
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #95 on: September 08, 2012, 02:44:40 AM »

I don't recall advocates of oral or anal sex ever demonstrating patristic support for their position.
I don't recall detractors of oral or anal sex ever demonstrating patristic support for any sexual position.  It seems that the urge to denigrate sex in general brought with it the urge to go into particulars, which those Fathers who spoke highly of marriage didn't seem to feel the need to go into.

It seems to be based on the idea that since sodomy is a "Western" term (not sure what the evidence for this assertion is, either)
It doesn't appear until Peter Damian (a saint and doctor of the Vatican)'s Liber Gomorrhianus, which condemned-in detail-various homosexual acts among the clergy.  He also had this to say to the wives of priests (whose marriages he held as void and nullifying their husband's orders and ministrations):
Quote
I address myself to you, you darlings of the priests, you tit-bits of the devil, poisons of the minds, daggers of souls, aconite of drinkers, bane of eaters, stuff of sin, occasion of destruction. To you I turn, I say , you whores of the ancient enemy, you hoopoes, vampires, bats, leeches, wolves. Come and hear me, you whores, you beds for fat swine to wallow in,
I agree. Wallowing in filth is the behavior of pigs and sodomites, not decent human beings created in the image and likeness of God.
Quote
you bedrooms of unclean spirits, you nymphs, you sirens, you harpies, you Dianas, you wicked tigresses, you furious vipers...
http://books.google.com/books?id=9MBnbFg-jJgC&pg=PA261&lpg=PA261&dq=%22occasion+of+destruction.+To+you+I+turn,+I+say,%22&source=bl&ots=K9oTXolNaN&sig=BMjKncJFcnqRNREMgvWOm0hV_yM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=FeBKUJaOAdOK2QW8sIAw&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22occasion%20of%20destruction.%20To%20you%20I%20turn%2C%20I%20say%2C%22&f=false
and when that failed, he castrated the priest.

therefore oral and anal sex are permitted within marriage. This is not what my bishop teaches.

I can't remember. Did we have a discussion about your bishop being in the Orthodox diptychs of the Catholic Church?

Which bishops teach that it is permitted? Do they provide patristic authority?
Like I said, most who respect the marital bed don't go into what goes on there.

My bishop is an authority on Orthodox teaching. You are not, so provide some support for your position from someone that has such authority.
Who says your bishop is an authority on Orthodox teaching?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Jonathan Gress
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 3,016


« Reply #96 on: September 08, 2012, 03:09:05 AM »

I don't recall advocates of oral or anal sex ever demonstrating patristic support for their position.
I don't recall detractors of oral or anal sex ever demonstrating patristic support for any sexual position.  It seems that the urge to denigrate sex in general brought with it the urge to go into particulars, which those Fathers who spoke highly of marriage didn't seem to feel the need to go into.

It seems to be based on the idea that since sodomy is a "Western" term (not sure what the evidence for this assertion is, either)
It doesn't appear until Peter Damian (a saint and doctor of the Vatican)'s Liber Gomorrhianus, which condemned-in detail-various homosexual acts among the clergy.  He also had this to say to the wives of priests (whose marriages he held as void and nullifying their husband's orders and ministrations):
Quote
I address myself to you, you darlings of the priests, you tit-bits of the devil, poisons of the minds, daggers of souls, aconite of drinkers, bane of eaters, stuff of sin, occasion of destruction. To you I turn, I say , you whores of the ancient enemy, you hoopoes, vampires, bats, leeches, wolves. Come and hear me, you whores, you beds for fat swine to wallow in,
I agree. Wallowing in filth is the behavior of pigs and sodomites, not decent human beings created in the image and likeness of God.
Quote
you bedrooms of unclean spirits, you nymphs, you sirens, you harpies, you Dianas, you wicked tigresses, you furious vipers...
http://books.google.com/books?id=9MBnbFg-jJgC&pg=PA261&lpg=PA261&dq=%22occasion+of+destruction.+To+you+I+turn,+I+say,%22&source=bl&ots=K9oTXolNaN&sig=BMjKncJFcnqRNREMgvWOm0hV_yM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=FeBKUJaOAdOK2QW8sIAw&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22occasion%20of%20destruction.%20To%20you%20I%20turn%2C%20I%20say%2C%22&f=false
and when that failed, he castrated the priest.

therefore oral and anal sex are permitted within marriage. This is not what my bishop teaches.

I can't remember. Did we have a discussion about your bishop being in the Orthodox diptychs of the Catholic Church?

Which bishops teach that it is permitted? Do they provide patristic authority?
Like I said, most who respect the marital bed don't go into what goes on there.

My bishop is an authority on Orthodox teaching. You are not, so provide some support for your position from someone that has such authority.
Who says your bishop is an authority on Orthodox teaching?

That's what bishops are. What are you, exactly?
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #97 on: September 08, 2012, 03:15:44 AM »

Quote
As for SINFUL, that's another issue.
There is no discussion that traditionally, it was considered sinful but of course, that there are some touchstonistas out there that wanna be  both in good standing in the church and also do their wives in the anus it becomes a sacred rite now. hopefully the great panorthodox council will revise the marriage rite including a blessing for anal play among pious neocoin couples.
There is no ¨was¨ to it. Sodomy is sin. You can sugar coat it and candy wrap it all you like but the fact remains. Sodomy is sin.
St. Paul “Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves ...They Shall Not Inherit The Kingdom of God
Sinners need to repent. And that includes men who used their wives anus.  Huh    
ἢ οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι ἄδικοι βασιλείαν Θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσι; μὴ πλανᾶσθε· οὔτε πόρνοι οὔτε εἰδωλολάτραι οὔτε μοιχοὶ οὔτε μαλακοὶ οὔτε ἀρσενοκοῖται
No sodomites there.
So, you will have to a) define your term "sodomy" and b) establish its Orthodoxy (as it is coined by the scholastic Damian in the 12th century, and doesn't appear in any Orthodox context well into the Western Captivity, in the Westernized law code of Peter) to argue your point.

I have already given a definition of sodomy on this thread.
So you did.
We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.
Who's "we"? You and Satan?

¨We¨ being the definition of a sodomite.

A person who practices sodomy

Sodomy (/ˈsɒdəmi/) is any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal.[1] The word is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible.[1] So-called "sodomy laws" in many countries criminalized not only these behaviors, but other disfavored sexual activities as well...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy#cite_note-ReferenceA-0
since, however, anyone can write on wikipedia (you didn't cite your authority.  Bad form), it gives no page number for the Oxford Dictionary, its purported source (I prefer Mr. Webster, who, however, isn't a Church Father.  Nor is Mr. Black, of Legal Dictionary fame), and it also gives the problem of ambiguity of the term:
Quote
Elsewhere, the legal use of the term "sodomy" is restricted to rape cases where anal penetration has taken place.  In French, the word "sodomie" (verb "sodomiser"), and in Spanish, the word "sodomía" (verb sodomizar), is used exclusively for anal penetration.  In modern German, the word "Sodomie" has no connotation of anal or oral sex, and refers specifically to bestiality. (See Paragraph 175 StGB, version of June 28, 1935.) The same goes for the Polish "sodomia". The Norwegian word "sodomi" carries the both senses.
and further, undermines the basis of the term, e.g.:
Quote
The Book of Wisdom, which is included in the Biblical canon by Orthodox and Roman Catholics, but excluded by modern Jews, Protestants, and other Christian denominations, makes reference to the story of Sodom, further emphasizing that their sin had been failing to practice hospitality:
 "And punishments came upon the sinners not without former signs by the force of thunders: for they suffered justly according to their own wickedness, insomuch as they used a more hard and hateful behavior toward strangers." "For the Sodomites did not receive those, whom they knew not when they came: but these brought friends into bondage, that had well deserved of them." (KJV, Wisdom 19:13-14)
despite your protestation
There is no need for another.

yes, there is.

But not to worry. Although your statement
You can look in any dictionary, they are all pretty much the same.
is unfounded, as Mr. Webster's first definition (3rd World, 2165) defines it as:
Quote
carnal copulation with a member of the same sex or with an animal
which I could live with (as a definition  Tongue), but I know would not please you, nor would be accepted by those who resent the term sodomy as applied to homosexuals and lumped with bestiality (I too would make a distinction), we can for sake of argument go with the one you seem to be suggesting:"any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal."

The first part is too vague, as the first is fine with married couples and hence not for unmarried and therefore homosexuals, and the second part is never fine.  Hence the term is too vague, yoking unequal members.

I have also given scripture showing the act of sodomy clearly to be a sin.
No, you have not.  In fact, your dependence on a mistranslation undermines your position.

If you do not like the fact that sodomy is considered a sin in Christianity this is your problem. Not mine.  
If you cannot read Greek, this is your problem.  Not mine.
« Last Edit: September 08, 2012, 03:19:31 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #98 on: September 08, 2012, 03:18:12 AM »

I don't recall advocates of oral or anal sex ever demonstrating patristic support for their position.
I don't recall detractors of oral or anal sex ever demonstrating patristic support for any sexual position.  It seems that the urge to denigrate sex in general brought with it the urge to go into particulars, which those Fathers who spoke highly of marriage didn't seem to feel the need to go into.

It seems to be based on the idea that since sodomy is a "Western" term (not sure what the evidence for this assertion is, either)
It doesn't appear until Peter Damian (a saint and doctor of the Vatican)'s Liber Gomorrhianus, which condemned-in detail-various homosexual acts among the clergy.  He also had this to say to the wives of priests (whose marriages he held as void and nullifying their husband's orders and ministrations):
Quote
I address myself to you, you darlings of the priests, you tit-bits of the devil, poisons of the minds, daggers of souls, aconite of drinkers, bane of eaters, stuff of sin, occasion of destruction. To you I turn, I say , you whores of the ancient enemy, you hoopoes, vampires, bats, leeches, wolves. Come and hear me, you whores, you beds for fat swine to wallow in,
I agree. Wallowing in filth is the behavior of pigs and sodomites, not decent human beings created in the image and likeness of God.
Quote
you bedrooms of unclean spirits, you nymphs, you sirens, you harpies, you Dianas, you wicked tigresses, you furious vipers...
http://books.google.com/books?id=9MBnbFg-jJgC&pg=PA261&lpg=PA261&dq=%22occasion+of+destruction.+To+you+I+turn,+I+say,%22&source=bl&ots=K9oTXolNaN&sig=BMjKncJFcnqRNREMgvWOm0hV_yM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=FeBKUJaOAdOK2QW8sIAw&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22occasion%20of%20destruction.%20To%20you%20I%20turn%2C%20I%20say%2C%22&f=false
and when that failed, he castrated the priest.

therefore oral and anal sex are permitted within marriage. This is not what my bishop teaches.

I can't remember. Did we have a discussion about your bishop being in the Orthodox diptychs of the Catholic Church?

Which bishops teach that it is permitted? Do they provide patristic authority?
Like I said, most who respect the marital bed don't go into what goes on there.

My bishop is an authority on Orthodox teaching. You are not, so provide some support for your position from someone that has such authority.
Who says your bishop is an authority on Orthodox teaching?

That's what bishops are. What are you, exactly?
A communicant with the Orthodox bishops in the diptychs of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.  Which is more, IIRC, than can be said for your bishop.

Who, btw, you have only invoked his authority, without citing him.

"That's what bishops are." Only whose in communion with the One, Holy, Catholic and Apoostolic Church.  And even then, they are not infallible.
« Last Edit: September 08, 2012, 03:21:28 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #99 on: September 08, 2012, 03:22:39 AM »

Quote
As for SINFUL, that's another issue.
There is no discussion that traditionally, it was considered sinful but of course, that there are some touchstonistas out there that wanna be  both in good standing in the church and also do their wives in the anus it becomes a sacred rite now. hopefully the great panorthodox council will revise the marriage rite including a blessing for anal play among pious neocoin couples.
There is no ¨was¨ to it. Sodomy is sin. You can sugar coat it and candy wrap it all you like but the fact remains. Sodomy is sin.
St. Paul “Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves ...They Shall Not Inherit The Kingdom of God
Sinners need to repent. And that includes men who used their wives anus.  Huh    
And who are you to call sinners to repentance?  What about the woman, should she repent for having her anus used by the man?

Who are you to ask stupid questions?
One dealing with stupid statements.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
JamesRottnek
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Anglican
Jurisdiction: Episcopal Diocese of Arizona
Posts: 5,103


I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine


« Reply #100 on: September 08, 2012, 03:40:20 AM »

We call the "sodomites" in our home.   We read a lot of older pioneer books to the children that talk about people being "gay" (meaning happy of course).  We didn't want to confuse the young ones.

You talk about sodomites in front of your kids?

I didn't even know what homosexuality was until I was well into my teens and my family certainly wasn't the type that held things back for the sake of child's ears.
You didn't grow up in today's (re)education system.

Ah, you mean the education system where we teach young people that they don't need to hate themselves? That one?
No, that one that teaches self loathing to boys, whites (especially Europeans, and worse yet Northern Europeans), heterosexuals, Christians-basically anyone not fitting in pet minority favored status.

Wait, so why do all the straight, white, upper-middle-class, Christian boys I went to school with NOT hate themselves?
Logged

I know a secret about a former Supreme Court Justice.  Can you guess what it is?

The greatest tragedy in the world is when a cigarette ends.

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #101 on: September 08, 2012, 03:53:14 AM »

We call the "sodomites" in our home.   We read a lot of older pioneer books to the children that talk about people being "gay" (meaning happy of course).  We didn't want to confuse the young ones.

You talk about sodomites in front of your kids?

I didn't even know what homosexuality was until I was well into my teens and my family certainly wasn't the type that held things back for the sake of child's ears.
You didn't grow up in today's (re)education system.

Ah, you mean the education system where we teach young people that they don't need to hate themselves? That one?
No, that one that teaches self loathing to boys, whites (especially Europeans, and worse yet Northern Europeans), heterosexuals, Christians-basically anyone not fitting in pet minority favored status.

Wait, so why do all the straight, white, upper-middle-class, Christian boys I went to school with NOT hate themselves?
Because you went to a school that taught you how to read hearts?

Or perhaps the parents pulled them out of today's (re)education system?
« Last Edit: September 08, 2012, 03:54:52 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #102 on: September 08, 2012, 03:58:34 AM »

We call the "sodomites" in our home.   We read a lot of older pioneer books to the children that talk about people being "gay" (meaning happy of course).  We didn't want to confuse the young ones.

You talk about sodomites in front of your kids?

I didn't even know what homosexuality was until I was well into my teens and my family certainly wasn't the type that held things back for the sake of child's ears.
You didn't grow up in today's (re)education system.

Ah, you mean the education system where we teach young people that they don't need to hate themselves? That one?
No, that one that teaches self loathing to boys, whites (especially Europeans, and worse yet Northern Europeans), heterosexuals, Christians-basically anyone not fitting in pet minority favored status.
Oh, to further identify it: the "education system" that finds it necessary to introduce sex ed in Kindergarten, read fairy tales about two mommies and dad's rooom-mate, advocate casual sex without the constraints of morality....that re-educational system."
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Shiny
Site Supporter
Muted
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #103 on: September 08, 2012, 05:16:37 AM »

I guess those Man-hungry church going women have starved themselves by this thread.
Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
Green_Umbrella
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 188



« Reply #104 on: September 08, 2012, 06:02:54 AM »

Quote
As for SINFUL, that's another issue.
There is no discussion that traditionally, it was considered sinful but of course, that there are some touchstonistas out there that wanna be  both in good standing in the church and also do their wives in the anus it becomes a sacred rite now. hopefully the great panorthodox council will revise the marriage rite including a blessing for anal play among pious neocoin couples.
There is no ¨was¨ to it. Sodomy is sin. You can sugar coat it and candy wrap it all you like but the fact remains. Sodomy is sin.
St. Paul “Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves ...They Shall Not Inherit The Kingdom of God
Sinners need to repent. And that includes men who used their wives anus.  Huh    
ἢ οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι ἄδικοι βασιλείαν Θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσι; μὴ πλανᾶσθε· οὔτε πόρνοι οὔτε εἰδωλολάτραι οὔτε μοιχοὶ οὔτε μαλακοὶ οὔτε ἀρσενοκοῖται
No sodomites there.
So, you will have to a) define your term "sodomy" and b) establish its Orthodoxy (as it is coined by the scholastic Damian in the 12th century, and doesn't appear in any Orthodox context well into the Western Captivity, in the Westernized law code of Peter) to argue your point.
I have already given a definition of sodomy on this thread.
So you did.
We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.
Who's "we"? You and Satan?
¨We¨ being the definition of a sodomite.
A person who practices sodomy
Sodomy (/ˈsɒdəmi/) is any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal.[1] The word is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible.[1] So-called "sodomy laws" in many countries criminalized not only these behaviors, but other disfavored sexual activities as well...
http://wj1.agxhqxwfduj.uk35.e.s35.hideme.ru/wiki/Sodomy#cite_note-ReferenceA-0
since, however, anyone can write on wikipedia (you didn't cite your authority.  Bad form), it gives no page number for the Oxford Dictionary, its purported source (I prefer Mr. Webster, who, however, isn't a Church Father.  Nor is Mr. Black, of Legal Dictionary fame), and it also gives the problem of ambiguity of the term:
Quote
Elsewhere, the legal use of the term "sodomy" is restricted to rape cases where anal penetration has taken place.  In French, the word "sodomie" (verb "sodomiser"), and in Spanish, the word "sodomía" (verb sodomizar), is used exclusively for anal penetration.  In modern German, the word "Sodomie" has no connotation of anal or oral sex, and refers specifically to bestiality. (See Paragraph 175 StGB, version of June 28, 1935.) The same goes for the Polish "sodomia". The Norwegian word "sodomi" carries the both senses.
and further, undermines the basis of the term, e.g.:
Quote
The Book of Wisdom, which is included in the Biblical canon by Orthodox and Roman Catholics, but excluded by modern Jews, Protestants, and other Christian denominations, makes reference to the story of Sodom, further emphasizing that their sin had been failing to practice hospitality:
"And punishments came upon the sinners not without former signs by the force of thunders: for they suffered justly according to their own wickedness, insomuch as they used a more hard and hateful behavior toward strangers." "For the Sodomites did not receive those, whom they knew not when they came: but these brought friends into bondage, that had well deserved of them." (KJV, Wisdom 19:13-14)
despite your protestation
There is no need for another.
yes, there is.
But not to worry. Although your statement
You can look in any dictionary, they are all pretty much the same.
is unfounded, as Mr. Webster's first definition (3rd World, 2165) defines it as:
Quote
carnal copulation with a member of the same sex or with an animal
which I could live with (as a definition  Tongue), but I know would not please you, nor would be accepted by those who resent the term sodomy as applied to homosexuals and lumped with bestiality (I too would make a distinction), we can for sake of argument go with the one you seem to be suggesting:"any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal."
The first part is too vague, as the first is fine with married couples and hence not for unmarried and therefore homosexuals, and the second part is never fine.  Hence the term is too vague, yoking unequal members.
I have also given scripture showing the act of sodomy clearly to be a sin.
No, you have not.  In fact, your dependence on a mistranslation undermines your position.
If you do not like the fact that sodomy is considered a sin in Christianity this is your problem. Not mine.  
If you cannot read Greek, this is your problem.  Not mine.

I think when I define ¨sodomy¨ as any unnatural and unclean sexual act I have an accurate definition.

Romans 1:27
In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

From this verse we can ask ourselves what is natural sexual relations between a man and a woman? Is it for the male to have intercourse using the females anus? No, it is not. The organs are not made for this act. There are problems. If anal sex between two men is unnatural and problematic why would not the same carry over to the female? I think it does. It seems common sense to me.

I do not understand what is to be gained by creating words and definitions to specifically target unnatural and unclean sexual acts among people anyways.  Huh
Logged
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,706


« Reply #105 on: September 08, 2012, 06:14:21 AM »

Quote
As for SINFUL, that's another issue.
There is no discussion that traditionally, it was considered sinful but of course, that there are some touchstonistas out there that wanna be  both in good standing in the church and also do their wives in the anus it becomes a sacred rite now. hopefully the great panorthodox council will revise the marriage rite including a blessing for anal play among pious neocoin couples.

There is no ¨was¨ to it. Sodomy is sin. You can sugar coat it and candy wrap it all you like but the fact remains. Sodomy is sin.
St. Paul “Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves ...They Shall Not Inherit The Kingdom of God
Sinners need to repent. And that includes men who used their wives anus.  Huh   
ἢ οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι ἄδικοι βασιλείαν Θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσι; μὴ πλανᾶσθε· οὔτε πόρνοι οὔτε εἰδωλολάτραι οὔτε μοιχοὶ οὔτε μαλακοὶ οὔτε ἀρσενοκοῖται

No sodomites there.



Mαλακοὶ can mean sodomites, but in attic greek it would be equivalent with the english word of effeminates  or even fags, which usually comes down to the same thing.  Ἀρσενοκοίτης definitly means homosexual, but men sleeping with men would be a more literal translation. Just my two cents.
« Last Edit: September 08, 2012, 06:26:07 AM by Cyrillic » Logged

On a temporary/semi-permanent/permanent vacation from OC.net.
podkarpatska
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,018


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #106 on: September 08, 2012, 09:16:07 AM »

The caustic comments, whether in jest or serious, hurt a lot of people.  People feel justified in their comments because somehow some sinners are less worthy of compassion and understanding.  It seems to me that some people think that compassion and understanding are somehow passions to be overcome.  Some people act as if compassion and understanding means that one is liberal and is willing to excuse/justify sinful behavior.  I just don't understand that.  Our Lord in the midst of His brutal, but saving, Passion sought to pardon the transgressions of those who murdered Him.  He was nothing but compassionate.

There are many in the Church who struggle with homosexuality.  They often feel alone.  They struggle to remain celibate, something that verges on an impossibility in this day and age, but is even more difficult when all they hear is caustic, mean-spirited comments from people in the Church, those very people who are essential in ensuring their salvation.  The celibate person cannot endure this yoke without his or her brothers and sisters in the Faith and most do not endure.  They feel isolated, completely alone.  Some here will say that they aren't speaking about celibate homosexuals, but only sexually active ones, but for those who struggle, that doesn't mean much.  The memories of teasing and taunting they endured from their peers and adults growing up comes  whirling back and hits like a fist.  For many, it is a reminder of how different they are and alone and a reminder to not hold out hope for a community that will support them. 

Many of your brothers and sisters who struggle with this issue have little support from anyone.  The gay community pities them and tries to "enlighten" them and/or holds them in absolute contempt and the Christian community doesn't seem to know how/is uncomfortable with/doesn't want to support those who struggle and/or holds them in absolute contempt. 

It is moments like these when the world seems most dark.  When those evil thoughts that the devil tries to put into the minds of those who struggle, those thoughts they constantly battle against, find their voice in the servants of Christ. 

I won't be returning to this thread and not even sure if I can return to this forum.  I'm not sure I could bear any of the responses I might get.

Lord, have mercy on your servants.



Hang in there. I figured that the discussion would continue. Perhaps those who feel the need to obsess on these issues and to loudly and crudely proclaim their opinions actually are somewhat insecure about their own, inner sexuality? Nah, of course not.
Logged
Punch
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,091



« Reply #107 on: September 08, 2012, 10:34:40 AM »

We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.
Who's "we"? You and Satan?

¨We¨ being the definition of a sodomite.

A person who practices sodomy

Sodomy (/ˈsɒdəmi/) is any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal.[1] The word is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible.[1] So-called "sodomy laws" in many countries criminalized not only these behaviors, but other disfavored sexual activities as well...


I guess we could call just about anyone a "sodomite", then. Because a heterosexual is probably just as likely to engage in oral and/or anal sex as anyone else.

Really? I know quite a few heterosexuals, happily married, who would never engage in oral and/or anal sex. They consider that disgusting and SINFUL.

Me too.

Yes.  Anal does not exite me.

I agree. Wallowing in filth is the behavior of pigs and sodomites, not decent human beings created in the image and likeness of God.
I have heard man on top, husband's penis entering wife's vagina during fertile period, eyes shut, no kissing, lights out, get it over with as quickly as posssible sex so described.

But for some people, that is good enough.  We can't (or realistically, shouldn't) exalt our own sex lives above our neighbor's.
Since I shouldn't, and don't, sleep with my neighbor's wife, I don't care what they do.

Why be explicit about it if you don't care what they do?


Because the is nothing that he likes better than sodomy and masturbation threads. ABTV
Logged

Orthodox only because of God and His Russians.
Punch
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,091



« Reply #108 on: September 08, 2012, 10:39:59 AM »

Quote
As for SINFUL, that's another issue.
There is no discussion that traditionally, it was considered sinful but of course, that there are some touchstonistas out there that wanna be  both in good standing in the church and also do their wives in the anus it becomes a sacred rite now. hopefully the great panorthodox council will revise the marriage rite including a blessing for anal play among pious neocoin couples.

There is no ¨was¨ to it. Sodomy is sin. You can sugar coat it and candy wrap it all you like but the fact remains. Sodomy is sin.
St. Paul “Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves ...They Shall Not Inherit The Kingdom of God
Sinners need to repent. And that includes men who used their wives anus.  Huh    

I seem to remember reading about BUFU in the Rudder.  It was considered one of the worst sins that a man could commit.  And the discussion was not one regarding homosexual behavior, but of a married man going anal on his wife.  I will try to find the page number for that discussion sometime today.  I used to be more neutral on that subject, but after reading that, I was very very happy that my wife had no interest in going there.
Logged

Orthodox only because of God and His Russians.
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,514


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #109 on: September 08, 2012, 10:52:41 AM »

Now for a serious question: what do you call a homosexual who doesn't engage in sodomy or any sexual activity whatsoever? 

Celibate.


Your Grace

 Wink
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Punch
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,091



« Reply #110 on: September 08, 2012, 10:53:12 AM »

I don't recall advocates of oral or anal sex ever demonstrating patristic support for their position.
I don't recall detractors of oral or anal sex ever demonstrating patristic support for any sexual position.  It seems that the urge to denigrate sex in general brought with it the urge to go into particulars, which those Fathers who spoke highly of marriage didn't seem to feel the need to go into.

It seems to be based on the idea that since sodomy is a "Western" term (not sure what the evidence for this assertion is, either)
It doesn't appear until Peter Damian (a saint and doctor of the Vatican)'s Liber Gomorrhianus, which condemned-in detail-various homosexual acts among the clergy.  He also had this to say to the wives of priests (whose marriages he held as void and nullifying their husband's orders and ministrations):
Quote
I address myself to you, you darlings of the priests, you tit-bits of the devil, poisons of the minds, daggers of souls, aconite of drinkers, bane of eaters, stuff of sin, occasion of destruction. To you I turn, I say , you whores of the ancient enemy, you hoopoes, vampires, bats, leeches, wolves. Come and hear me, you whores, you beds for fat swine to wallow in,
I agree. Wallowing in filth is the behavior of pigs and sodomites, not decent human beings created in the image and likeness of God.
Quote
you bedrooms of unclean spirits, you nymphs, you sirens, you harpies, you Dianas, you wicked tigresses, you furious vipers...
http://books.google.com/books?id=9MBnbFg-jJgC&pg=PA261&lpg=PA261&dq=%22occasion+of+destruction.+To+you+I+turn,+I+say,%22&source=bl&ots=K9oTXolNaN&sig=BMjKncJFcnqRNREMgvWOm0hV_yM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=FeBKUJaOAdOK2QW8sIAw&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22occasion%20of%20destruction.%20To%20you%20I%20turn%2C%20I%20say%2C%22&f=false
and when that failed, he castrated the priest.

therefore oral and anal sex are permitted within marriage. This is not what my bishop teaches.

I can't remember. Did we have a discussion about your bishop being in the Orthodox diptychs of the Catholic Church?

Which bishops teach that it is permitted? Do they provide patristic authority?
Like I said, most who respect the marital bed don't go into what goes on there.

My bishop is an authority on Orthodox teaching. You are not, so provide some support for your position from someone that has such authority.
Who says your bishop is an authority on Orthodox teaching?

Perhaps since he has the Grace of the Holy Spirit from Ordination, and you don't.  I may be suspicious of clerics due to my Lutheran background, but I still consider any canonical Bishop a bit higher on the Orthodox totem pole than pretty much any layman (the exception being those very few laymen that even Bishops recognize to have particular Grace).  Your arguments on this subject are really rather ridiculous.  Do you really believe that any Bishop would say "go ahead and pump her in the dumper"?  Do you really believe that ANY council, if asked the question, would agree to anal (or even oral) sex?  This is a yes or no question.  And if you cannot answer it as "no", I am probably done taking anything that you have to say about Orthodoxy seriously. There is a BIG difference between doing what is wrong out of weakness, and justifying what is wrong.  
Logged

Orthodox only because of God and His Russians.
Punch
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,091



« Reply #111 on: September 08, 2012, 11:24:25 AM »

Quote
As for SINFUL, that's another issue.
There is no discussion that traditionally, it was considered sinful but of course, that there are some touchstonistas out there that wanna be  both in good standing in the church and also do their wives in the anus it becomes a sacred rite now. hopefully the great panorthodox council will revise the marriage rite including a blessing for anal play among pious neocoin couples.

There is no ¨was¨ to it. Sodomy is sin. You can sugar coat it and candy wrap it all you like but the fact remains. Sodomy is sin.
St. Paul “Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves ...They Shall Not Inherit The Kingdom of God
Sinners need to repent. And that includes men who used their wives anus.  Huh    

I seem to remember reading about BUFU in the Rudder.  It was considered one of the worst sins that a man could commit.  And the discussion was not one regarding homosexual behavior, but of a married man going anal on his wife.  I will try to find the page number for that discussion sometime today.  I used to be more neutral on that subject, but after reading that, I was very very happy that my wife had no interest in going there.

Pages 943-944, footnotes.
Logged

Orthodox only because of God and His Russians.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #112 on: September 08, 2012, 11:36:10 AM »

Quote
As for SINFUL, that's another issue.
There is no discussion that traditionally, it was considered sinful but of course, that there are some touchstonistas out there that wanna be  both in good standing in the church and also do their wives in the anus it becomes a sacred rite now. hopefully the great panorthodox council will revise the marriage rite including a blessing for anal play among pious neocoin couples.

There is no ¨was¨ to it. Sodomy is sin. You can sugar coat it and candy wrap it all you like but the fact remains. Sodomy is sin.
St. Paul “Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves ...They Shall Not Inherit The Kingdom of God
Sinners need to repent. And that includes men who used their wives anus.  Huh   
ἢ οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι ἄδικοι βασιλείαν Θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσι; μὴ πλανᾶσθε· οὔτε πόρνοι οὔτε εἰδωλολάτραι οὔτε μοιχοὶ οὔτε μαλακοὶ οὔτε ἀρσενοκοῖται

No sodomites there.



Mαλακοὶ can mean sodomites, but in attic greek it would be equivalent with the english word of effeminates  or even fags, which usually comes down to the same thing.  Ἀρσενοκοίτης definitly means homosexual, but men sleeping with men would be a more literal translation. Just my two cents.
Mαλακοὶ is "catamite," to be precise, which down the road around the 8th century or so (I don't recall exactly when) became "masturbator."  Mαλακοὶ doesn't mean "sodomite" because a) we don't have a precise meaning to that word in English (in contrast to French or Spanish, where it really means Ἀρσενοκοίτης, or German, where it doesn't mean Mαλακοὶ-there not being many passive recipients of bestiality  Roll Eyes).  IOW, the word can't be proof texted by this verse, because anyone who could translate Mαλακοὶ as "sodomite" would be compelled even more so to so translate  Ἀρσενοκοίτης as well.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #113 on: September 08, 2012, 11:53:51 AM »

Quote
As for SINFUL, that's another issue.
There is no discussion that traditionally, it was considered sinful but of course, that there are some touchstonistas out there that wanna be  both in good standing in the church and also do their wives in the anus it becomes a sacred rite now. hopefully the great panorthodox council will revise the marriage rite including a blessing for anal play among pious neocoin couples.
There is no ¨was¨ to it. Sodomy is sin. You can sugar coat it and candy wrap it all you like but the fact remains. Sodomy is sin.
St. Paul “Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves ...They Shall Not Inherit The Kingdom of God
Sinners need to repent. And that includes men who used their wives anus.  Huh    
ἢ οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι ἄδικοι βασιλείαν Θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσι; μὴ πλανᾶσθε· οὔτε πόρνοι οὔτε εἰδωλολάτραι οὔτε μοιχοὶ οὔτε μαλακοὶ οὔτε ἀρσενοκοῖται
No sodomites there.
So, you will have to a) define your term "sodomy" and b) establish its Orthodoxy (as it is coined by the scholastic Damian in the 12th century, and doesn't appear in any Orthodox context well into the Western Captivity, in the Westernized law code of Peter) to argue your point.
I have already given a definition of sodomy on this thread.
So you did.
We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.
Who's "we"? You and Satan?
¨We¨ being the definition of a sodomite.
A person who practices sodomy
Sodomy (/ˈsɒdəmi/) is any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal.[1] The word is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible.[1] So-called "sodomy laws" in many countries criminalized not only these behaviors, but other disfavored sexual activities as well...
http://wj1.agxhqxwfduj.uk35.e.s35.hideme.ru/wiki/Sodomy#cite_note-ReferenceA-0
since, however, anyone can write on wikipedia (you didn't cite your authority.  Bad form), it gives no page number for the Oxford Dictionary, its purported source (I prefer Mr. Webster, who, however, isn't a Church Father.  Nor is Mr. Black, of Legal Dictionary fame), and it also gives the problem of ambiguity of the term:
Quote
Elsewhere, the legal use of the term "sodomy" is restricted to rape cases where anal penetration has taken place.  In French, the word "sodomie" (verb "sodomiser"), and in Spanish, the word "sodomía" (verb sodomizar), is used exclusively for anal penetration.  In modern German, the word "Sodomie" has no connotation of anal or oral sex, and refers specifically to bestiality. (See Paragraph 175 StGB, version of June 28, 1935.) The same goes for the Polish "sodomia". The Norwegian word "sodomi" carries the both senses.
and further, undermines the basis of the term, e.g.:
Quote
The Book of Wisdom, which is included in the Biblical canon by Orthodox and Roman Catholics, but excluded by modern Jews, Protestants, and other Christian denominations, makes reference to the story of Sodom, further emphasizing that their sin had been failing to practice hospitality:
"And punishments came upon the sinners not without former signs by the force of thunders: for they suffered justly according to their own wickedness, insomuch as they used a more hard and hateful behavior toward strangers." "For the Sodomites did not receive those, whom they knew not when they came: but these brought friends into bondage, that had well deserved of them." (KJV, Wisdom 19:13-14)
despite your protestation
There is no need for another.
yes, there is.
But not to worry. Although your statement
You can look in any dictionary, they are all pretty much the same.
is unfounded, as Mr. Webster's first definition (3rd World, 2165) defines it as:
Quote
carnal copulation with a member of the same sex or with an animal
which I could live with (as a definition  Tongue), but I know would not please you, nor would be accepted by those who resent the term sodomy as applied to homosexuals and lumped with bestiality (I too would make a distinction), we can for sake of argument go with the one you seem to be suggesting:"any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal."
The first part is too vague, as the first is fine with married couples and hence not for unmarried and therefore homosexuals, and the second part is never fine.  Hence the term is too vague, yoking unequal members.
I have also given scripture showing the act of sodomy clearly to be a sin.
No, you have not.  In fact, your dependence on a mistranslation undermines your position.
If you do not like the fact that sodomy is considered a sin in Christianity this is your problem. Not mine.  
If you cannot read Greek, this is your problem.  Not mine.

I think when I define ¨sodomy¨ as any unnatural and unclean sexual act I have an accurate definition.

One that St. Jerome, "St." Peter Damian et alia would approve of, as they denigrated "man on top, husband's penis entering wife's vagina during fertile period, eyes shut, no kissing, lights out, get it over with as quickly as posssible sex."

Romans 1:27
In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.
Yes, I dealt with your prooftexting above:
I do not think sodomy is just a term for homosexual activity. Look at Romans 1:27...

And the men, instead of having normal sexual relations with women, burned with lust for each other. Men did shameful things with other men, and as a result of this sin, they suffered within themselves the penalty they deserved.

When St Paul writes the men left ¨normal sexual relations with women¨ I am thinking penile/vaginal copulation. Not  penile/anal copulation. The penile/anal copulation is just as abnormal no matter if the receiver is male or female. The organs are not made to go together...at all.  
Not much on kissing I guess.

From this verse we can ask ourselves what is natural sexual relations between a man and a woman?
We can ask ourselves, but on what basis do you judge?

Is it for the male to have intercourse using the females anus? No, it is not. The organs are not made for this act.
The speech organs are not made for speaking either, and yet we speak.  On the thread linked above IIRC I dealt with this silly, scholastic argument as proposed by Lactantius.

There are problems. If anal sex between two men is unnatural and problematic why would not the same carry over to the female?
Because two men can't get married.

I think it does. It seems common sense to me.
Was it Aristotle who said the unexamined life was not worth living?

Error shared does not make truth, no matter how commonly shared.

I do not understand what is to be gained by creating words and definitions to specifically target unnatural and unclean sexual acts among people anyways.  Huh
So fornication, adultery and marriage (yes, the patristics you are going to have to depend on to defend your POV basically lump the last with the other two) are just the same thing. Huh
« Last Edit: September 08, 2012, 11:55:23 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #114 on: September 08, 2012, 12:03:29 PM »

We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.
Who's "we"? You and Satan?

¨We¨ being the definition of a sodomite.

A person who practices sodomy

Sodomy (/ˈsɒdəmi/) is any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal.[1] The word is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible.[1] So-called "sodomy laws" in many countries criminalized not only these behaviors, but other disfavored sexual activities as well...


I guess we could call just about anyone a "sodomite", then. Because a heterosexual is probably just as likely to engage in oral and/or anal sex as anyone else.

Really? I know quite a few heterosexuals, happily married, who would never engage in oral and/or anal sex. They consider that disgusting and SINFUL.

Me too.

Yes.  Anal does not exite me.

I agree. Wallowing in filth is the behavior of pigs and sodomites, not decent human beings created in the image and likeness of God.
I have heard man on top, husband's penis entering wife's vagina during fertile period, eyes shut, no kissing, lights out, get it over with as quickly as posssible sex so described.

But for some people, that is good enough.  We can't (or realistically, shouldn't) exalt our own sex lives above our neighbor's.
Since I shouldn't, and don't, sleep with my neighbor's wife, I don't care what they do.

Why be explicit about it if you don't care what they do?


Because the is nothing that he likes better than sodomy and masturbation threads. ABTV
25,000+, and the vast majority have nothing to do with sodomy or mastrubation.  Makes me wonder about those who only notice my posts on sodomy (however that term is defined: given your German background, do we have a thread on bestiality?) and masturbation.

ABTV?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #115 on: September 08, 2012, 12:06:16 PM »

Quote
As for SINFUL, that's another issue.
There is no discussion that traditionally, it was considered sinful but of course, that there are some touchstonistas out there that wanna be  both in good standing in the church and also do their wives in the anus it becomes a sacred rite now. hopefully the great panorthodox council will revise the marriage rite including a blessing for anal play among pious neocoin couples.

There is no ¨was¨ to it. Sodomy is sin. You can sugar coat it and candy wrap it all you like but the fact remains. Sodomy is sin.
St. Paul “Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves ...They Shall Not Inherit The Kingdom of God
Sinners need to repent. And that includes men who used their wives anus.  Huh    

I seem to remember reading about BUFU in the Rudder.  It was considered one of the worst sins that a man could commit.  And the discussion was not one regarding homosexual behavior, but of a married man going anal on his wife.  I will try to find the page number for that discussion sometime today.  I used to be more neutral on that subject, but after reading that, I was very very happy that my wife had no interest in going there.
While you are looking that up, can you look up where it rants against married couples seeing each other nude, against married couples showering together, and how it exorts priests to break up the families of mixed marriages?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #116 on: September 08, 2012, 12:07:05 PM »

Now for a serious question: what do you call a homosexual who doesn't engage in sodomy or any sexual activity whatsoever? 

Celibate.


Your Grace

 Wink
One hopes.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,706


« Reply #117 on: September 08, 2012, 12:19:24 PM »

Quote
As for SINFUL, that's another issue.
There is no discussion that traditionally, it was considered sinful but of course, that there are some touchstonistas out there that wanna be  both in good standing in the church and also do their wives in the anus it becomes a sacred rite now. hopefully the great panorthodox council will revise the marriage rite including a blessing for anal play among pious neocoin couples.

There is no ¨was¨ to it. Sodomy is sin. You can sugar coat it and candy wrap it all you like but the fact remains. Sodomy is sin.
St. Paul “Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves ...They Shall Not Inherit The Kingdom of God
Sinners need to repent. And that includes men who used their wives anus.  Huh   
ἢ οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι ἄδικοι βασιλείαν Θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσι; μὴ πλανᾶσθε· οὔτε πόρνοι οὔτε εἰδωλολάτραι οὔτε μοιχοὶ οὔτε μαλακοὶ οὔτε ἀρσενοκοῖται

No sodomites there.



Mαλακοὶ can mean sodomites, but in attic greek it would be equivalent with the english word of effeminates  or even fags, which usually comes down to the same thing.  Ἀρσενοκοίτης definitly means homosexual, but men sleeping with men would be a more literal translation. Just my two cents.
Mαλακοὶ is "catamite," to be precise, which down the road around the 8th century or so (I don't recall exactly when) became "masturbator."  Mαλακοὶ doesn't mean "sodomite" because a) we don't have a precise meaning to that word in English (in contrast to French or Spanish, where it really means Ἀρσενοκοίτης, or German, where it doesn't mean Mαλακοὶ-there not being many passive recipients of bestiality  Roll Eyes).  IOW, the word can't be proof texted by this verse, because anyone who could translate Mαλακοὶ as "sodomite" would be compelled even more so to so translate  Ἀρσενοκοίτης as well.

Actually, Mαλακóς has a lot of meanings. I looked it up in my dictionary and it says Mαλακια can mean effeminacy. Oh, the joys of the greek language  Smiley
« Last Edit: September 08, 2012, 12:20:49 PM by Cyrillic » Logged

On a temporary/semi-permanent/permanent vacation from OC.net.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #118 on: September 08, 2012, 12:41:47 PM »

I don't recall advocates of oral or anal sex ever demonstrating patristic support for their position.
I don't recall detractors of oral or anal sex ever demonstrating patristic support for any sexual position.  It seems that the urge to denigrate sex in general brought with it the urge to go into particulars, which those Fathers who spoke highly of marriage didn't seem to feel the need to go into.

It seems to be based on the idea that since sodomy is a "Western" term (not sure what the evidence for this assertion is, either)
It doesn't appear until Peter Damian (a saint and doctor of the Vatican)'s Liber Gomorrhianus, which condemned-in detail-various homosexual acts among the clergy.  He also had this to say to the wives of priests (whose marriages he held as void and nullifying their husband's orders and ministrations):
Quote
I address myself to you, you darlings of the priests, you tit-bits of the devil, poisons of the minds, daggers of souls, aconite of drinkers, bane of eaters, stuff of sin, occasion of destruction. To you I turn, I say , you whores of the ancient enemy, you hoopoes, vampires, bats, leeches, wolves. Come and hear me, you whores, you beds for fat swine to wallow in,
I agree. Wallowing in filth is the behavior of pigs and sodomites, not decent human beings created in the image and likeness of God.
Quote
you bedrooms of unclean spirits, you nymphs, you sirens, you harpies, you Dianas, you wicked tigresses, you furious vipers...
http://books.google.com/books?id=9MBnbFg-jJgC&pg=PA261&lpg=PA261&dq=%22occasion+of+destruction.+To+you+I+turn,+I+say,%22&source=bl&ots=K9oTXolNaN&sig=BMjKncJFcnqRNREMgvWOm0hV_yM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=FeBKUJaOAdOK2QW8sIAw&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22occasion%20of%20destruction.%20To%20you%20I%20turn%2C%20I%20say%2C%22&f=false
and when that failed, he castrated the priest.

therefore oral and anal sex are permitted within marriage. This is not what my bishop teaches.

I can't remember. Did we have a discussion about your bishop being in the Orthodox diptychs of the Catholic Church?

Which bishops teach that it is permitted? Do they provide patristic authority?
Like I said, most who respect the marital bed don't go into what goes on there.

My bishop is an authority on Orthodox teaching. You are not, so provide some support for your position from someone that has such authority.
Who says your bishop is an authority on Orthodox teaching?
Perhaps since he has the Grace of the Holy Spirit from Ordination, and you don't.
So does Bp. Lazar Puhalo, and it He is claimed by even more, vagranti, types.

IIRC, Jonathan Gress' bishops say that the Orthodox bishops in the diptychs of the Catholic Church lack grace.  If he is wrong on such an obvious and pivotal matter, why would I accept an appel to his (still unnamed) authority?  Why should we Huh

I may be suspicious of clerics due to my Lutheran background, but I still consider any canonical Bishop a bit higher on the Orthodox totem pole than pretty much any layman (the exception being those very few laymen that even Bishops recognize to have particular Grace).
And on that, except my Lutheran background didn't give me any anti-clerical suspicions, we are agreed.  But since Jonathan's bishop is not a canonical bishop, why do you bring that point up?

Your arguments on this subject are really rather ridiculous.  Do you really believe that any Bishop would say "go ahead and pump her in the dumper"?  Do you really believe that ANY council, if asked the question, would agree to anal (or even oral) sex?  This is a yes or no question.
No, it is not.  You'd be surprised: back in the day in Holy Mother Russia, when they held a synod on the question of priests (let alone the laity) failing to fast from marital relations during Great Lent, those who wished to condemn and penance, were laughed and balked at by the senior metropolitans.

And if you cannot answer it as "no", I am probably done taking anything that you have to say about Orthodoxy seriously. There is a BIG difference between doing what is wrong out of weakness, and justifying what is wrong.  
Well, then you have a problem, because those on whom you would depend to uphold what you have to say also justify "man on top, husband's penis entering wife's vagina during fertile period, eyes shut, no kissing, lights out, get it over with as quickly as posssible sex" as a concession to human weakness.

The idea of a "Sodomy Synod" sounds rather interesting. Should we hold it in the Patriarchate of Jerusalem? What precedence would we follow, as AFAICR, no synod has ever been held on an aspect of moral theology?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Jonathan Gress
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 3,016


« Reply #119 on: September 08, 2012, 12:46:40 PM »

@Isa:

For the record, my bishop has authority for various reasons: he is a bishop, with the special charismatic grace of the episcopacy to teach the faith; he grew up in the bosom of the Church, in a pious family, and with two uncles who were Hagiorites; he has lived the monastic life under the guidance of these uncles, and others in both the Greek (Old Calendar) and Russian (ROCOR) churches; for formal education he studied theology at the Theological School in Athens (he was a classmate of Patriarch Irineos of Jerusalem). He has never (as far as I know) preached about sexual behavior in marriage; this is something I have learned about from him in private conversation.

What about you? On what authority do you teach things that go against the conscience of just about everyone else in the room?

You are right this is not a topic which is proper for public preaching, except when certain people try to publicly argue that such behavior is compatible with Orthodoxy, in which case it is necessary to publicly refute it. I am inclined to believe my bishop since what he says fits with what I know the Church teaches about sexuality elsewhere e.g. in the penitential canons of St John the Faster, or in the Slavonic penitential literature described in Eve Levin's book. I know you like to be clever and argue that these canons have no authority, but otherwise your entire argument is one from silence. You claim that all the positive evidence against your position has no authority, and argue from this that since no authorities that you accept discuss the issues, they must somehow silently agree with you. But on this basis you could equally argue that by their silence they disagree with you. So far you haven't provided any positive evidence in your favor: no Father or Council, or even any bishop with whom you are in communion. I believe Punch is absolutely right that you would never find any Church authority claiming that unnatural sexual acts are permissible in marriage.
Logged
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,706


« Reply #120 on: September 08, 2012, 12:54:30 PM »

This thread is beyond silly.
« Last Edit: September 08, 2012, 12:54:52 PM by Cyrillic » Logged

On a temporary/semi-permanent/permanent vacation from OC.net.
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 7,865


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #121 on: September 08, 2012, 12:55:47 PM »

Now for a serious question: what do you call a homosexual who doesn't engage in sodomy or any sexual activity whatsoever?  

Celibate.


Not quite. Apparently today, celibate just means not marrying while still engaging in ungodly sexual activity (fornication, adultery, etc.) outside of marriage. Thus, living a celibate life apparently is not equal to living a chaste life.

Married couples can live chaste lives and still have marital intercourse. Chastity within marriage was certainly observed by Saints Joachim and Anna. However, some elderly married couples may not have marital intercourse by choice or by inability to function.

Those with a homosexual orientation are called by God to live a chaste and pure life, not just a celibate life. Nevertheless, all Christians are called to live a chaste and pure life according to their vocation in life, so no one is being singled out. Those in the monastic ranks should live according to the vow of chastity (the angelic life) which is different from living a chaste and pure life. Living a chaste life or the angelic life requires prayer and fasting.
« Last Edit: September 08, 2012, 01:12:10 PM by Maria » Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #122 on: September 08, 2012, 01:22:09 PM »

Quote
As for SINFUL, that's another issue.
There is no discussion that traditionally, it was considered sinful but of course, that there are some touchstonistas out there that wanna be  both in good standing in the church and also do their wives in the anus it becomes a sacred rite now. hopefully the great panorthodox council will revise the marriage rite including a blessing for anal play among pious neocoin couples.

There is no ¨was¨ to it. Sodomy is sin. You can sugar coat it and candy wrap it all you like but the fact remains. Sodomy is sin.
St. Paul “Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves ...They Shall Not Inherit The Kingdom of God
Sinners need to repent. And that includes men who used their wives anus.  Huh    

I seem to remember reading about BUFU in the Rudder.  It was considered one of the worst sins that a man could commit.  And the discussion was not one regarding homosexual behavior, but of a married man going anal on his wife.  I will try to find the page number for that discussion sometime today.  I used to be more neutral on that subject, but after reading that, I was very very happy that my wife had no interest in going there.

Pages 943-944, footnotes.
LOL. Ah yes, the translator's uncanonical (he was a follower, actually more of a worshipper, if you read his interpolations) 2 cents.  IIRC he also appeales to the "scientific fact" that masturbation basically makes you physically enemic, so much so that you can tell a masturbator just by looking at him (I don't recall if he countenances the existence of female mastrubation).
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
HabteSelassie
Ises and I-ity
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 3,332



« Reply #123 on: September 08, 2012, 01:27:06 PM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

 Tongue

stay blessed,
habte selassie
« Last Edit: September 08, 2012, 01:29:19 PM by HabteSelassie » Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,522



« Reply #124 on: September 08, 2012, 01:30:24 PM »

Just like in Cecil B. DeMille epics, so are sex and religion are a popular combination on this forum.  Tongue
Logged

Michal: "SC, love you in this thread."
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #125 on: September 08, 2012, 02:04:44 PM »

@Isa:

For the record, my bishop has authority for various reasons: he is a bishop, with the special charismatic grace of the episcopacy to teach the faith; he grew up in the bosom of the Church, in a pious family, and with two uncles who were Hagiorites; he has lived the monastic life under the guidance of these uncles, and others in both the Greek (Old Calendar) and Russian (ROCOR) churches; for formal education he studied theology at the Theological School in Athens (he was a classmate of Patriarch Irineos of Jerusalem).
Your bishop rejects the authority of Pope Theodore of Alexandria, Patriarch Ignatius IV of Antioch and the Holy Synod of the Orthodox Church in America.  As such, he lacks the authority you are invoking fro him.

He has never (as far as I know) preached about sexual behavior in marriage; this is something I have learned about from him in private conversation

What about you? On what authority do you teach things that go against the conscience of just about everyone else in the room?
Amazing: the Monothelite Emperor argued the same appeal to authority against St. Maximos the Confessor.  The Emperor, a layman, challenged the right of St. Maximos, a layman, to challenge the whole Synod of Bishops.

Truth is not up for a voice vote.  Given your bishops' dependence on the incident of St. Maximos to excuse their schism, how did you miss that?

You are right this is not a topic which is proper for public preaching, except when certain people try to publicly argue that such behavior is compatible with Orthodoxy, in which case it is necessary to publicly refute it.
Or when certain people try to publically argue that their private dislikes are mandated by Orthodoxy, in which case it is necessary to publically refute it.

I am inclined to believe my bishop since what he says fits with what I know the Church teaches about sexuality elsewhere e.g. in the penitential canons of St John the Faster, or in the Slavonic penitential literature described in Eve Levin's book
Then you are against kissing, even married couples touching their feet, seeing the other unclothed...and all those other "disgusting" practices that said canons penance.  You are also thereby bound to assert that homosexual anal penetrating sex is no worse than dorsal sex ("doggy style") vaginal pentrating sex by a married couple.  And condemn-horror of horros!-any wife on top of her husband love-making positions.

I know you like to be clever and argue that these canons have no authority
Perhaps you can explain their authority, when the Ecumenical Councils withheld their authority from them, something that even the Pedalion admits.

but otherwise your entire argument is one from silence.

You are right this is not a topic which is proper for public preaching
He has never (as far as I know) preached about sexual behavior in marriage; this is something I have learned about from him in private conversation
That goes for "man on top, husband's penis entering wife's vagina during fertile period, eyes shut, no kissing, lights out, get it over with as quickly as posssible sex" as well.  Unfortunatley, many remain silent even to defend that.

You claim that all the positive evidence against your position has no authority
No, I demonstrate that that "positive evidence" is negative against  "man on top, husband's penis entering wife's vagina during fertile period, eyes shut, no kissing, lights out, get it over with as quickly as posssible sex" as well.  As such, it has only as much authority as you want to give to semi-(if not full blown)gnosticism.
and argue from this that since no authorities that you accept discuss the issues, they must somehow silently agree with you.
Care to quote me on that?

But on this basis you could equally argue that by their silence they disagree with you.
To judge by the defenses offered here, evidently not.


So far you haven't provided any positive evidence in your favor: no Father or Council, or even any bishop with whom you are in communion.
You are right this is not a topic which is proper for public preaching
He has never (as far as I know) preached about sexual behavior in marriage; this is something I have learned about from him in private conversation
I haven't invoked my bishops authority either.

I believe Punch is absolutely right that you would never find any Church authority claiming that unnatural sexual acts are permissible in marriage.
Sorry, I don't yield the definition of the terms of debate.  You bear the burden of finding some basis to label any sexual act between a married couple as "unnatural."  At least the Vatican, when it condemns contraception as "unnatural" even within marriage, takes up that burden.
« Last Edit: September 08, 2012, 02:07:07 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #126 on: September 08, 2012, 02:05:54 PM »

Just like in Cecil B. DeMille epics, so are sex and religion are a popular combination on this forum.  Tongue
I remember being shocked at how shocked I was to find out how rare chastity was on the set of "The Ten Commandments."
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
SolEX01
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 10,986


WWW
« Reply #127 on: September 08, 2012, 02:08:16 PM »

Quote
As for SINFUL, that's another issue.
There is no discussion that traditionally, it was considered sinful but of course, that there are some touchstonistas out there that wanna be  both in good standing in the church and also do their wives in the anus it becomes a sacred rite now. hopefully the great panorthodox council will revise the marriage rite including a blessing for anal play among pious neocoin couples.
There is no ¨was¨ to it. Sodomy is sin. You can sugar coat it and candy wrap it all you like but the fact remains. Sodomy is sin.
St. Paul “Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves ...They Shall Not Inherit The Kingdom of God
Sinners need to repent. And that includes men who used their wives anus.  Huh    
And who are you to call sinners to repentance?  What about the woman, should she repent for having her anus used by the man?

Who are you to ask stupid questions?

I am a sinner.  Besides, you haven't answered either question.   Smiley
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #128 on: September 08, 2012, 02:14:09 PM »

Now for a serious question: what do you call a homosexual who doesn't engage in sodomy or any sexual activity whatsoever?  

Celibate.


Not quite. Apparently today, celibate just means not marrying while still engaging in ungodly sexual activity (fornication, adultery, etc.) outside of marriage. Thus, living a celibate life apparently is not equal to living a chaste life.

Married couples can live chaste lives and still have marital intercourse. Chastity within marriage was certainly observed by Saints Joachim and Anna. However, some elderly married couples may not have marital intercourse by choice or by inability to function.
Impotence does not chastity make.

Those with a homosexual orientation are called by God to live a chaste and pure life, not just a celibate life.
Confusing homosexual orientation with a call to monasticism, along with the "definition" of chastity you accurately gave above (although it predates "today" by quite some time, at least a millenium), has caused all sorts of woes, and not just with the Vatican.

Nevertheless, all Christians are called to live a chaste and pure life according to their vocation in life
Amen!
so no one is being singled out.
Amen!
Those in the monastic ranks should live according to the vow of chastity (the angelic life)

Amen!
which is different from living a chaste and pure life.
Amen!
Living a chaste life or the angelic life requires prayer and fasting.
Amen!
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #129 on: September 08, 2012, 02:27:30 PM »

Quote
As for SINFUL, that's another issue.
There is no discussion that traditionally, it was considered sinful but of course, that there are some touchstonistas out there that wanna be  both in good standing in the church and also do their wives in the anus it becomes a sacred rite now. hopefully the great panorthodox council will revise the marriage rite including a blessing for anal play among pious neocoin couples.

There is no ¨was¨ to it. Sodomy is sin. You can sugar coat it and candy wrap it all you like but the fact remains. Sodomy is sin.
St. Paul “Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves ...They Shall Not Inherit The Kingdom of God
Sinners need to repent. And that includes men who used their wives anus.  Huh   
ἢ οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι ἄδικοι βασιλείαν Θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσι; μὴ πλανᾶσθε· οὔτε πόρνοι οὔτε εἰδωλολάτραι οὔτε μοιχοὶ οὔτε μαλακοὶ οὔτε ἀρσενοκοῖται

No sodomites there.



Mαλακοὶ can mean sodomites, but in attic greek it would be equivalent with the english word of effeminates  or even fags, which usually comes down to the same thing.  Ἀρσενοκοίτης definitly means homosexual, but men sleeping with men would be a more literal translation. Just my two cents.
Mαλακοὶ is "catamite," to be precise, which down the road around the 8th century or so (I don't recall exactly when) became "masturbator."  Mαλακοὶ doesn't mean "sodomite" because a) we don't have a precise meaning to that word in English (in contrast to French or Spanish, where it really means Ἀρσενοκοίτης, or German, where it doesn't mean Mαλακοὶ-there not being many passive recipients of bestiality  Roll Eyes).  IOW, the word can't be proof texted by this verse, because anyone who could translate Mαλακοὶ as "sodomite" would be compelled even more so to so translate  Ἀρσενοκοίτης as well.

Actually, Mαλακóς has a lot of meanings. I looked it up in my dictionary and it says Mαλακια can mean effeminacy. Oh, the joys of the greek language  Smiley
Semitic as well:זנות had the same broad-and vague-semantic range as πορνεία, and of course those who like to go into deep detail about what they find disgusting try to define their personal dislikes into the definition (I see that the Vatican has redefined it into "invalid marriage" to support their Corban factories a/k/a the marriage tribunals/annullment dispensaries).

Btw, on the verse in question, some insight might be given by the discussions in the Talmud (since the rabbis were married men, unlike monks who imitated them in compiling penitentials), given that St. Paul had that same education as a Pharisee.  The scribes and rabbis worked with a rather broad definiton of "natural," including anal penetration (ejaculating there, however, was a sticking point).  I've been told by someone who knows far, FAR more on this topic than I do (the development of Jewish Law, not anal sex) that the rabbis were extremely laid back in the Talmudic period, i.e. when St. Paul was their colleague.  The idea of categorizing the privacy of marriage didn't happen until they came under the spell of Scholasticism, something that perhaps the condemers here might want to defend their reliance on Thomas Aquinas.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Jonathan Gress
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 3,016


« Reply #130 on: September 08, 2012, 04:29:34 PM »

Isa, you are simply saying that anal and oral sex are permitted in marriage. My bishop says not. He may be wrong, but you will have to provide a higher authority to justify yourself. My bishop outranks you in terms of authority, so simply offering your own interpretation of what's allowed and what isn't, without any positive statement in your favor from some universally recognized authority, like a Church Father or Council, doesn't cut it. And I don't think it's legitimate in Orthodox theology to argue from silence in the written record, let alone cherry-pick among various written authorities, like conveniently labeling everything that disagrees with you as the product of some nebulous "Western captivity". There is such a thing as unwritten tradition and unwritten authority. Even if there were no written statement on this matter whatsoever, the fact that my bishop tells me these acts are wrong should be taken as authoritative, unless you could show me that other bishops at other times said otherwise.

I don't know about the kissing and so forth. I am not saying that every canon has to be enforced to the letter; that is always up to the bishop. But there is surely a gradation in terms of the gravity of various sins. Kissing may be sinful to some degree, but surely not as much as unnatural sexual acts. A bishop may decide that kissing is not grave enough to earn a penance, but he wouldn't say the same for fornication. My point with respects to the canons of the Faster is that my bishop is not the only authority I've come across to condemn unnatural sexual activity, or sodomy. Coming across this condemnation in more than one place confirms in my mind that the Church really does condemn these acts.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #131 on: September 08, 2012, 04:57:36 PM »

Isa, you are simply saying that anal and oral sex are permitted in marriage. My bishop says not. He may be wrong, but you will have to provide a higher authority to justify yourself.
I'm sorry, how did I have to justify myself to either you or your bishop again?

My bishop outranks you in terms of authority
as he is not in the Orthodox diptychs of the Catholic Church, he has no authority. Otherwise, why appeal to your bishop's authority when you can appeal to His Holiness'?


so simply offering your own interpretation of what's allowed and what isn't, without any positive statement in your favor from some universally recognized authority, like a Church Father or Council, doesn't cut it.

And your offering your own interpretation of what's allowed and what isn't, without any positive statement in your favor from some universally recognized authority, like a Church Father or Council, cuts it how?

And I don't think it's legitimate in Orthodox theology to argue from silence in the written record, let alone cherry-pick among various written authorities

then why do you do it?

like conveniently labeling everything that disagrees with you as the product of some nebulous "Western captivity".
I've done no such thing: I have only pointed out, the IRREFUTABLE fact, that the term "sodomy" was developed within the Scholastic Latin West, and did not enter Orthodox discourse until  Peter suppressed the Orthodox Patriarchate and imposed his Westernization.  Nothing more.

The Western Captivity is anything but nebulous, that being the nature of Scholasticism and all.

There is such a thing as unwritten tradition and unwritten authority.
Yes, married couples share it.

Even if there were no written statement on this matter whatsoever, the fact that my bishop tells me these acts are wrong should be taken as authoritative
by me?  No, his authority doesn't jump over schism.

unless you could show me that other bishops at other times said otherwise.
Why?  Do you want a green light?

I don't know about the kissing and so forth. I am not saying that every canon has to be enforced to the letter;
Ah, but, appealing to them, you must.

that is always up to the bishop.
then he is delict in his duties if he isn't peeking into the bedrooms of the flock.

But there is surely a gradation in terms of the gravity of various sins.
There is: and your canons say that homosexual anal penetrating sex is no worse than heterosexual married dorsal  vaginal penetrating sex.  I don't recall offhand what their gradation of wife on top of husband is on the "gravity of various sins."

Kissing may be sinful to some degree
between the married, no, 0 degree, never sinful.

but surely not as much as unnatural sexual acts.
Like contraception?

A bishop may decide that kissing is not grave enough to earn a penance
no, he may not.

but he wouldn't say the same for fornication.
one perhaps would hope not, barring circumstances.

My point with respects to the canons of the Faster is that my bishop is not the only authority
they have no Ecumenical authority, notwithstanding the Pedalion's "argument from silence" that they do.

I've come across to condemn unnatural sexual activity, or sodomy.
there's that problem with the basis of definition of terms again

Coming across this condemnation in more than one place confirms in my mind that the Church really does condemn these acts.
well, your mind made up, I hope your wife feels the same.

Btw, I am simply saying that I have no basis to say anal and oral sex (like kissing or hand holding, dorsal vaginal sex or positions with the wife on top) are banned within wedlock.
« Last Edit: September 08, 2012, 05:00:51 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Green_Umbrella
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 188



« Reply #132 on: September 08, 2012, 05:25:31 PM »

Quote
As for SINFUL, that's another issue.
There is no discussion that traditionally, it was considered sinful but of course, that there are some touchstonistas out there that wanna be  both in good standing in the church and also do their wives in the anus it becomes a sacred rite now. hopefully the great panorthodox council will revise the marriage rite including a blessing for anal play among pious neocoin couples.
There is no ¨was¨ to it. Sodomy is sin. You can sugar coat it and candy wrap it all you like but the fact remains. Sodomy is sin.
St. Paul “Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves ...They Shall Not Inherit The Kingdom of God
Sinners need to repent. And that includes men who used their wives anus.  Huh    
ἢ οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι ἄδικοι βασιλείαν Θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσι; μὴ πλανᾶσθε· οὔτε πόρνοι οὔτε εἰδωλολάτραι οὔτε μοιχοὶ οὔτε μαλακοὶ οὔτε ἀρσενοκοῖται
No sodomites there.
So, you will have to a) define your term "sodomy" and b) establish its Orthodoxy (as it is coined by the scholastic Damian in the 12th century, and doesn't appear in any Orthodox context well into the Western Captivity, in the Westernized law code of Peter) to argue your point.
I have already given a definition of sodomy on this thread.
So you did.
We call them ¨sodomites¨ too.
Who's "we"? You and Satan?
¨We¨ being the definition of a sodomite.
A person who practices sodomy
Sodomy (/ˈsɒdəmi/) is any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal.[1] The word is derived from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in chapters 18 and 19 of the Book of Genesis in the Bible.[1] So-called "sodomy laws" in many countries criminalized not only these behaviors, but other disfavored sexual activities as well...
http://wj1.agxhqxwfduj.uk35.e.s35.hideme.ru/wiki/Sodomy#cite_note-ReferenceA-0
since, however, anyone can write on wikipedia (you didn't cite your authority.  Bad form), it gives no page number for the Oxford Dictionary, its purported source (I prefer Mr. Webster, who, however, isn't a Church Father.  Nor is Mr. Black, of Legal Dictionary fame), and it also gives the problem of ambiguity of the term:
Quote
Elsewhere, the legal use of the term "sodomy" is restricted to rape cases where anal penetration has taken place.  In French, the word "sodomie" (verb "sodomiser"), and in Spanish, the word "sodomía" (verb sodomizar), is used exclusively for anal penetration.  In modern German, the word "Sodomie" has no connotation of anal or oral sex, and refers specifically to bestiality. (See Paragraph 175 StGB, version of June 28, 1935.) The same goes for the Polish "sodomia". The Norwegian word "sodomi" carries the both senses.
and further, undermines the basis of the term, e.g.:
Quote
The Book of Wisdom, which is included in the Biblical canon by Orthodox and Roman Catholics, but excluded by modern Jews, Protestants, and other Christian denominations, makes reference to the story of Sodom, further emphasizing that their sin had been failing to practice hospitality:
"And punishments came upon the sinners not without former signs by the force of thunders: for they suffered justly according to their own wickedness, insomuch as they used a more hard and hateful behavior toward strangers." "For the Sodomites did not receive those, whom they knew not when they came: but these brought friends into bondage, that had well deserved of them." (KJV, Wisdom 19:13-14)
despite your protestation
There is no need for another.
yes, there is.
But not to worry. Although your statement
You can look in any dictionary, they are all pretty much the same.
is unfounded, as Mr. Webster's first definition (3rd World, 2165) defines it as:
Quote
carnal copulation with a member of the same sex or with an animal
which I could live with (as a definition  Tongue), but I know would not please you, nor would be accepted by those who resent the term sodomy as applied to homosexuals and lumped with bestiality (I too would make a distinction), we can for sake of argument go with the one you seem to be suggesting:"any non-penile/vaginal copulation-like act, such as oral or anal sex, or sex between a person and an animal."
The first part is too vague, as the first is fine with married couples and hence not for unmarried and therefore homosexuals, and the second part is never fine.  Hence the term is too vague, yoking unequal members.
I have also given scripture showing the act of sodomy clearly to be a sin.
No, you have not.  In fact, your dependence on a mistranslation undermines your position.
If you do not like the fact that sodomy is considered a sin in Christianity this is your problem. Not mine.  
If you cannot read Greek, this is your problem.  Not mine.

I think when I define ¨sodomy¨ as any unnatural and unclean sexual act I have an accurate definition.

One that St. Jerome, "St." Peter Damian et alia would approve of, as they denigrated "man on top, husband's penis entering wife's vagina during fertile period, eyes shut, no kissing, lights out, get it over with as quickly as posssible sex."

Romans 1:27
In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.
Yes, I dealt with your prooftexting above:
I do not think sodomy is just a term for homosexual activity. Look at Romans 1:27...

And the men, instead of having normal sexual relations with women, burned with lust for each other. Men did shameful things with other men, and as a result of this sin, they suffered within themselves the penalty they deserved.

When St Paul writes the men left ¨normal sexual relations with women¨ I am thinking penile/vaginal copulation. Not  penile/anal copulation. The penile/anal copulation is just as abnormal no matter if the receiver is male or female. The organs are not made to go together...at all.  
Not much on kissing I guess.

From this verse we can ask ourselves what is natural sexual relations between a man and a woman?
We can ask ourselves, but on what basis do you judge?

Is it for the male to have intercourse using the females anus? No, it is not. The organs are not made for this act.
The speech organs are not made for speaking either, and yet we speak.  On the thread linked above IIRC I dealt with this silly, scholastic argument as proposed by Lactantius.

There are problems. If anal sex between two men is unnatural and problematic why would not the same carry over to the female?
Because two men can't get married.

I think it does. It seems common sense to me.
Was it Aristotle who said the unexamined life was not worth living?

Error shared does not make truth, no matter how commonly shared.

I do not understand what is to be gained by creating words and definitions to specifically target unnatural and unclean sexual acts among people anyways.  Huh
So fornication, adultery and marriage (yes, the patristics you are going to have to depend on to defend your POV basically lump the last with the other two) are just the same thing. Huh

I do not think it necessary to go into many specifics on why normal sexual relations between men and women do not include anal sex. Again, this seems common sense to me. Something you apparently lack. The female can be injured. The male can be made sick by the bacteria. And that is just for starters. It is not a good practice. It is sodomy.  Sodomy being biblically defined as any unnatural and unclean sexual act. This is the basis for my opinion. I think it is on very solid ground. Your ideas, not so much.     

Logged
Basil 320
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,984



« Reply #133 on: September 08, 2012, 05:30:42 PM »

Now for a serious question: what do you call a homosexual who doesn't engage in sodomy or any sexual activity whatsoever?  

Celibate.


Not quite. Apparently today, celibate just means not marrying while still engaging in ungodly sexual activity (fornication, adultery, etc.) outside of marriage. Thus, living a celibate life apparently is not equal to living a chaste life.

Married couples can live chaste lives and still have marital intercourse. Chastity within marriage was certainly observed by Saints Joachim and Anna. However, some elderly married couples may not have marital intercourse by choice or by inability to function.

Those with a homosexual orientation are called by God to live a chaste and pure life, not just a celibate life. Nevertheless, all Christians are called to live a chaste and pure life according to their vocation in life, so no one is being singled out. Those in the monastic ranks should live according to the vow of chastity (the angelic life) which is different from living a chaste and pure life. Living a chaste life or the angelic life requires prayer and fasting.

"Those with a homosexual 'orientation' are" not only "called to live a chaste and pure life," but to grow in life in Christ as all are called, and grow in their spirituality, but homosexuals must work on correcting their perverted tendency.  "God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him, male and female created He them...and the Lord God said, It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him...the Lord God...took one of Adam's ribs...and ...made He a women and brought her unto the man.  And Adam said, This is now bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh, she shall be called Women for she was taken out of Man.  Therefore shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall be one flesh."  Extracted from Genesis 1:27, 2:18, 21, 22, 23.  This is the natural order.

Contemporary psychology since the 1970's adopted the politically correct agenda, dropping its previous understanding of homosexuality as a mental disturbance.  Archbishop Chrysostoms of Etna (CA), of the St. Gregory Palamas Monastery and the Center for Traditionalist Orthodox Studies, American Exarch of the moderate Old Calendar Greek Synod in Resistance,  who earned multiple graduate and post graduate degrees from Eastern schools, has written that he has served as the spiritual father of homosexuals and with a great deal of work and prayer, ultimately corrected the sexually perverse homosexual feelings, correcting their so called "orientation."  It is a long and difficult process, but the point is, homosexual feelings can be corrected, returning people to the natural order.
Logged

"...Strengthen the Orthodox Community..."
SolEX01
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 10,986


WWW
« Reply #134 on: September 08, 2012, 05:44:18 PM »

I do not think it necessary to go into many specifics on why normal sexual relations between men and women do not include anal sex. Again, this seems common sense to me. Something you apparently lack. The female can be injured. The male can be made sick by the bacteria. And that is just for starters. It is not a good practice.

For some married people, you're exactly right.  Yet, there are married couples that want to experiment outside the bounds of "normal" sexuality.  Example, women are reading the 50 Shades of Grey series of books.  Care to know what it's about?

Quote
"50 Shades of Grey" tells the story of the very unconventional “romance” between the dashing, wealthy Christian Grey, a tycoon with a taste for the whip, and the innocent Anastasia Steele, a college literary student who willingly enters into a complicated dominant-submissive relationship with Grey.

What Bishop has outlawed sado-masochism as unnatural and unclean?  After all, sado-masochism can injure the female; sado-masochism can also injure the male; I don't find it good practice; however, I'm not one to tell someone else not to do it nor would I be inclined to engage in that kind of play not because my salvation is at stake ... I don't like it.

It is sodomy.  Sodomy being biblically defined as any unnatural and unclean sexual act. This is the basis for my opinion. I think it is on very solid ground. Your ideas, not so much.     

But the Bible has never told us what is unnatural and unclean.  This is like whether or not we should eat pork (no pun intended).
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #135 on: September 08, 2012, 06:15:27 PM »

I do not think it necessary to go into many specifics on why normal sexual relations between men and women do not include anal sex. Again, this seems common sense to me.
Then keep it between you and the Mrs.
Something you apparently lack.
Something you definitely claim, despite lacking basis.

The female can be injured.
Any number of ways in penis-vaginal sex.

The male can be made sick by the bacteria.
also not lacking in your oriface of choice.

And that is just for starters. It is not a good practice.
Don't like it, don't do it.

It is sodomy.  Sodomy being biblically defined as any unnatural and unclean sexual act.
Sodomy isn't a biblical term, consequently the Bible doesn't define sodomy.

Now we need your definition of "unnatural" and "unclean."

This is the basis for my opinion.
No, your opinion is the basis for your eisogesis.

I think it is on very solid ground.
Proverbs 26:12.

Your ideas, not so much.
« Last Edit: September 08, 2012, 06:26:52 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
podkarpatska
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,018


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #136 on: September 08, 2012, 06:43:19 PM »

And little old me thought that poor St. Augustine of Hippo was responsible for the fixation on sex among certain of the faithful....glad to know it gets the passions rolling in the East as well.

This whole conversation is - stupid. Period. There was a book some years ago called 'Everything I need to Know I learned in Kindergarten.' The author could do well to pen a sequel called - 'Everything I need to know about Sex and Marriage as taught by the Church I should have learned in Sunday School.' Enough already.
Logged
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #137 on: September 08, 2012, 06:45:30 PM »

Regardless of what someone calls it, it's wrong.
Logged
Green_Umbrella
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 188



« Reply #138 on: September 08, 2012, 06:45:56 PM »

I do not think it necessary to go into many specifics on why normal sexual relations between men and women do not include anal sex. Again, this seems common sense to me.
Then keep it between you and the Mrs.
Something you apparently lack.
Something you definitely claim, despite lacking basis.

The female can be injured.
Any number of ways in penis-vaginal sex.

The male can be made sick by the bacteria.
also not lacking in your oriface of choice.

And that is just for starters. It is not a good practice.
Don't like it, don't do it.

It is sodomy.  Sodomy being biblically defined as any unnatural and unclean sexual act.
Sodomy isn't a biblical term, consequently the Bible doesn't define sodomy.

Now we need your definition of "unnatural" and "unclean."

This is the basis for my opinion.
No, your opinion is the basis for your eisogesis.

I think it is on very solid ground.
Proverbs 26:12.

Your ideas, not so much.


To try and equate the inherent health risks of penile/anal copulation to penile/vaginal copulation between a healthy male and female goes beyond any honest and/or intelligent attempt at dialogue. I will waste no more time with you.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #139 on: September 08, 2012, 06:53:27 PM »

This commercial reminds me of the odd preeed-i-LEC-tions of this thread
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NR3BVN8ofk8
and this of those who spend so much time on professing their disgust for things that disgust them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TbSQeNh0mE
For the record, I can't stand Miracle Whip, or mayonnaise.
« Last Edit: September 08, 2012, 07:00:25 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #140 on: September 08, 2012, 06:58:12 PM »

I do not think it necessary to go into many specifics on why normal sexual relations between men and women do not include anal sex. Again, this seems common sense to me.
Then keep it between you and the Mrs.
Something you apparently lack.
Something you definitely claim, despite lacking basis.

The female can be injured.
Any number of ways in penis-vaginal sex.

The male can be made sick by the bacteria.
also not lacking in your oriface of choice.

And that is just for starters. It is not a good practice.
Don't like it, don't do it.

It is sodomy.  Sodomy being biblically defined as any unnatural and unclean sexual act.
Sodomy isn't a biblical term, consequently the Bible doesn't define sodomy.

Now we need your definition of "unnatural" and "unclean."

This is the basis for my opinion.
No, your opinion is the basis for your eisogesis.

I think it is on very solid ground.
Proverbs 26:12.

Your ideas, not so much.


To try and equate the inherent health risks of penile/anal copulation to penile/vaginal copulation between a healthy male and female goes beyond any honest and/or intelligent attempt at dialogue. I will waste no more time with you.
I dare say, you'll be wasting time with someone else then.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #141 on: September 08, 2012, 06:58:59 PM »

Regardless of what someone calls it, it's wrong.

What is?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
SolEX01
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 10,986


WWW
« Reply #142 on: September 08, 2012, 07:01:04 PM »

To try and equate the inherent health risks of penile/anal copulation to penile/vaginal copulation between a healthy male and female goes beyond any honest and/or intelligent attempt at dialogue. I will waste no more time with you.

Fractured penises (regardless of how they are fractured) are more common than you think in hospital emergency rooms.

What if the male and female aren't healthy?  What if they're old?  Do you know that there's a higher incidence of sexually transmitted diseases among the elderly?  Yep, they're having unprotected sex in their nursing home, assisted living facility, etc.  Blame erectile dysfunction medications, lubricants, whatever - man wants to, as the late Marvin Gaye would put it, "get it on."
Logged
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #143 on: September 08, 2012, 10:02:59 PM »

Regardless of what someone calls it, it's wrong.


What is?
Relative to the thread title.
« Last Edit: September 08, 2012, 10:04:20 PM by Kerdy » Logged
JamesRottnek
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Anglican
Jurisdiction: Episcopal Diocese of Arizona
Posts: 5,103


I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine


« Reply #144 on: September 08, 2012, 11:48:16 PM »

We call the "sodomites" in our home.   We read a lot of older pioneer books to the children that talk about people being "gay" (meaning happy of course).  We didn't want to confuse the young ones.

You talk about sodomites in front of your kids?

I didn't even know what homosexuality was until I was well into my teens and my family certainly wasn't the type that held things back for the sake of child's ears.
You didn't grow up in today's (re)education system.

Ah, you mean the education system where we teach young people that they don't need to hate themselves? That one?
No, that one that teaches self loathing to boys, whites (especially Europeans, and worse yet Northern Europeans), heterosexuals, Christians-basically anyone not fitting in pet minority favored status.

Wait, so why do all the straight, white, upper-middle-class, Christian boys I went to school with NOT hate themselves?
Because you went to a school that taught you how to read hearts?

Or perhaps the parents pulled them out of today's (re)education system?

They most certainly attended public school from kindergarten through high school, and about 85% of them are attending public colleges/universities right now.

Logged

I know a secret about a former Supreme Court Justice.  Can you guess what it is?

The greatest tragedy in the world is when a cigarette ends.

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011
JamesRottnek
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Anglican
Jurisdiction: Episcopal Diocese of Arizona
Posts: 5,103


I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine


« Reply #145 on: September 08, 2012, 11:48:16 PM »

We call the "sodomites" in our home.   We read a lot of older pioneer books to the children that talk about people being "gay" (meaning happy of course).  We didn't want to confuse the young ones.

You talk about sodomites in front of your kids?

I didn't even know what homosexuality was until I was well into my teens and my family certainly wasn't the type that held things back for the sake of child's ears.
You didn't grow up in today's (re)education system.

Ah, you mean the education system where we teach young people that they don't need to hate themselves? That one?
No, that one that teaches self loathing to boys, whites (especially Europeans, and worse yet Northern Europeans), heterosexuals, Christians-basically anyone not fitting in pet minority favored status.
Oh, to further identify it: the "education system" that finds it necessary to introduce sex ed in Kindergarten, read fairy tales about two mommies and dad's rooom-mate, advocate casual sex without the constraints of morality....that re-educational system."

I've yet to encounter this education system either.
Logged

I know a secret about a former Supreme Court Justice.  Can you guess what it is?

The greatest tragedy in the world is when a cigarette ends.

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #146 on: September 09, 2012, 12:02:31 AM »

We call the "sodomites" in our home.   We read a lot of older pioneer books to the children that talk about people being "gay" (meaning happy of course).  We didn't want to confuse the young ones.

You talk about sodomites in front of your kids?

I didn't even know what homosexuality was until I was well into my teens and my family certainly wasn't the type that held things back for the sake of child's ears.
You didn't grow up in today's (re)education system.

Ah, you mean the education system where we teach young people that they don't need to hate themselves? That one?
No, that one that teaches self loathing to boys, whites (especially Europeans, and worse yet Northern Europeans), heterosexuals, Christians-basically anyone not fitting in pet minority favored status.
Oh, to further identify it: the "education system" that finds it necessary to introduce sex ed in Kindergarten, read fairy tales about two mommies and dad's rooom-mate, advocate casual sex without the constraints of morality....that re-educational system."

I've yet to encounter this education system either.
The fish in the tank doesn't know it's wet?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #147 on: September 09, 2012, 12:03:23 AM »

Regardless of what someone calls it, it's wrong.


What is?
Relative to the thread title.
same sex marriage?  Yes.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Opus118
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,419



« Reply #148 on: September 09, 2012, 12:25:01 AM »

We call the "sodomites" in our home.   We read a lot of older pioneer books to the children that talk about people being "gay" (meaning happy of course).  We didn't want to confuse the young ones.

You talk about sodomites in front of your kids?

I didn't even know what homosexuality was until I was well into my teens and my family certainly wasn't the type that held things back for the sake of child's ears.
You didn't grow up in today's (re)education system.

Ah, you mean the education system where we teach young people that they don't need to hate themselves? That one?
No, that one that teaches self loathing to boys, whites (especially Europeans, and worse yet Northern Europeans), heterosexuals, Christians-basically anyone not fitting in pet minority favored status.
Oh, to further identify it: the "education system" that finds it necessary to introduce sex ed in Kindergarten, read fairy tales about two mommies and dad's rooom-mate, advocate casual sex without the constraints of morality....that re-educational system."

I've yet to encounter this education system either.

You are dealing with talking points James. It has little or nothing to do with reality. Yet World Orthodoxy must be swayed by these sorts of arguments.

I do appreciate your posts James and although you might not like to hear this under moderation, your ability to identify crap has never been better.

Logged
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #149 on: September 09, 2012, 01:17:14 AM »

Regardless of what someone calls it, it's wrong.


What is?
Relative to the thread title.
same sex marriage?  Yes.
Sex outside marriage and same sex sexual encounters as well.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #150 on: September 09, 2012, 01:20:00 AM »

We call the "sodomites" in our home.   We read a lot of older pioneer books to the children that talk about people being "gay" (meaning happy of course).  We didn't want to confuse the young ones.

You talk about sodomites in front of your kids?

I didn't even know what homosexuality was until I was well into my teens and my family certainly wasn't the type that held things back for the sake of child's ears.
You didn't grow up in today's (re)education system.

Ah, you mean the education system where we teach young people that they don't need to hate themselves? That one?
No, that one that teaches self loathing to boys, whites (especially Europeans, and worse yet Northern Europeans), heterosexuals, Christians-basically anyone not fitting in pet minority favored status.
Oh, to further identify it: the "education system" that finds it necessary to introduce sex ed in Kindergarten, read fairy tales about two mommies and dad's rooom-mate, advocate casual sex without the constraints of morality....that re-educational system."

I've yet to encounter this education system either.

You are dealing with talking points James. It has little or nothing to do with reality.
\
I teach public high school in inner city Chicago.  Doesn't get more real.

Yet World Orthodoxy must be swayed by these sorts of arguments.

I do appreciate your posts James and although you might not like to hear this under moderation, your ability to identify crap has never been better.
This isn't MSNBC
« Last Edit: September 09, 2012, 01:21:59 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #151 on: September 09, 2012, 01:20:25 AM »

Regardless of what someone calls it, it's wrong.


What is?
Relative to the thread title.
same sex marriage?  Yes.
Sex outside marriage and same sex sexual encounters as well.
Yes again.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 7,865


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #152 on: September 09, 2012, 01:20:42 AM »

Now for a serious question: what do you call a homosexual who doesn't engage in sodomy or any sexual activity whatsoever?  

Celibate.


Not quite. Apparently today, celibate just means not marrying while still engaging in ungodly sexual activity (fornication, adultery, etc.) outside of marriage. Thus, living a celibate life apparently is not equal to living a chaste life.

Married couples can live chaste lives and still have marital intercourse. Chastity within marriage was certainly observed by Saints Joachim and Anna. However, some elderly married couples may not have marital intercourse by choice or by inability to function.

Those with a homosexual orientation are called by God to live a chaste and pure life, not just a celibate life. Nevertheless, all Christians are called to live a chaste and pure life according to their vocation in life, so no one is being singled out. Those in the monastic ranks should live according to the vow of chastity (the angelic life) which is different from living a chaste and pure life. Living a chaste life or the angelic life requires prayer and fasting.

"Those with a homosexual 'orientation' are" not only "called to live a chaste and pure life," but to grow in life in Christ as all are called, and grow in their spirituality, but homosexuals must work on correcting their perverted tendency.  "God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him, male and female created He them...and the Lord God said, It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him...the Lord God...took one of Adam's ribs...and ...made He a women and brought her unto the man.  And Adam said, This is now bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh, she shall be called Women for she was taken out of Man.  Therefore shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall be one flesh."  Extracted from Genesis 1:27, 2:18, 21, 22, 23.  This is the natural order.

Contemporary psychology since the 1970's adopted the politically correct agenda, dropping its previous understanding of homosexuality as a mental disturbance.  Archbishop Chrysostoms of Etna (CA), of the St. Gregory Palamas Monastery and the Center for Traditionalist Orthodox Studies, American Exarch of the moderate Old Calendar Greek Synod in Resistance,  who earned multiple graduate and post graduate degrees from Eastern schools, has written that he has served as the spiritual father of homosexuals and with a great deal of work and prayer, ultimately corrected the sexually perverse homosexual feelings, correcting their so called "orientation."  It is a long and difficult process, but the point is, homosexual feelings can be corrected, returning people to the natural order.

We are all called to live chaste and pure lives according to our station in life. Sodomy is not pure nor chaste, neither is fornication or adultery.

I do believe that through the Grace of God, those persons who wish to repent and change their lives can  do so. This takes prayer, fasting, humility, perseverance, faith, hope, and love. No matter what our disordered passions are, we can change and repent as nothing is impossible with God. However, it does take time and patience to subdue our passions. Only through patience will we obtain the Crown of Glory.
Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
SolEX01
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 10,986


WWW
« Reply #153 on: September 09, 2012, 01:46:23 AM »

We are all called to live chaste and pure lives according to our station in life. Sodomy is not pure nor chaste, neither is fornication or adultery.

I do believe that through the Grace of God, those persons who wish to repent and change their lives can  do so. This takes prayer, fasting, humility, perseverance, faith, hope, and love. No matter what our disordered passions are, we can change and repent as nothing is impossible with God. However, it does take time and patience to subdue our passions. Only through patience will we obtain the Crown of Glory.

I can receive the Crown of Glory after wallowing through filth like a pig?  What if one takes an erectile dysfunction medication, should one stop sex cold turkey to avoid being tempted by the undefined sodomy and the more clearly defined fornication and adultery?  I just can't look at nursing homes and assisted living facilities the same way after reading an AARP magazine article describing sexual trends and sexually transmitted diseases among the elderly.  What if there's a now elderly wife (or widow) who tired of "man on top, husband's penis entering wife's vagina during fertile period, eyes shut, no kissing, lights out, get it over with as quickly as possible sex" and wants to experience a different view of sexuality without being condemned to wallow through filth like a pig?   Huh
Logged
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,762


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #154 on: September 09, 2012, 04:07:27 AM »

We call the "sodomites" in our home.   We read a lot of older pioneer books to the children that talk about people being "gay" (meaning happy of course).  We didn't want to confuse the young ones.


On the frontier 
Yes, we build cabins out of trees

On the frontier
Yes, you can put your mind at ease

On the frontier 
Come on now, people, make a stand 

On the frontier! On the frontier! 

Can't you see we need a hand 

On the frontier 
Come on, protect the motherland 

On the frontier
Come on and join your fellow man 

On the frontier
Come on people, and make a stand 

On the frontier! On the frontier!
Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

"Simply put, if you’re not willing to take what is dearest to you, whether plans or people, and kiss it goodbye, you can’t be my disciple."
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,343



« Reply #155 on: September 09, 2012, 04:09:38 AM »

We call the "sodomites" in our home.   We read a lot of older pioneer books to the children that talk about people being "gay" (meaning happy of course).  We didn't want to confuse the young ones.

I highly recommend: Little Home o' the Prayery.

Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
JamesRottnek
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Anglican
Jurisdiction: Episcopal Diocese of Arizona
Posts: 5,103