OrthodoxChristianity.net
November 26, 2014, 11:18:31 AM *
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  
Poll
Question: Homosexuality comes up frequenbtly on Orthodox forums because..
Some folks who need Prozac aren't on it yet. - 19 (26.8%)
Since drunkeness, adultery, theft and dishonesty have been eradicated it's the only sin left to fight - 10 (14.1%)
Apparently most Orthodox Christians have lots of gay family, friends and associates - 7 (9.9%)
Orthodox forums attract a lot of self torturing closet cases and men with doubts about thier own masculinity - 20 (28.2%)
Some folks who need Prozac aren't on it yet. - 15 (21.1%)
Total Voters: 71

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 »   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Yet Another Gay Marriage Thread  (Read 70915 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #540 on: November 04, 2009, 12:58:41 AM »

Tell me what you think Christ would have said if the Pharisees had brought forth to him a pair of monogamous homosexual lovers? Would he have judged and condemned them? Told them their love was invalid and wrong? "You can't love each other. Stop loving each other and force yourself to love people of the opposite sex instead, or don't love at all." That doesn't sound very Christ-like at all in my opinion.

"Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more." John 8:11

How do you know he wouldn't have said, 'Love one another as I have loved you' John 15:12?

I don't. But in reference to a sexual sin, He said "Sin no more." Therefore I identified a quote from a similiar context.

Interesting how the entire point of the parable was a condemnation of judging the actions of others and, yet, you seem to think the important part was about sexual sin...then again, so did the Pharisees.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
John of the North
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christianity
Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Edmonton and the West
Posts: 3,533


Christ is Risen!

tgild
« Reply #541 on: November 04, 2009, 01:02:03 AM »

Tell me what you think Christ would have said if the Pharisees had brought forth to him a pair of monogamous homosexual lovers? Would he have judged and condemned them? Told them their love was invalid and wrong? "You can't love each other. Stop loving each other and force yourself to love people of the opposite sex instead, or don't love at all." That doesn't sound very Christ-like at all in my opinion.

"Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more." John 8:11

How do you know he wouldn't have said, 'Love one another as I have loved you' John 15:12?

I don't. But in reference to a sexual sin, He said "Sin no more." Therefore I identified a quote from a similiar context.

Interesting how the entire point of the parable was a condemnation of judging the actions of others and, yet, you seem to think the important part was about sexual sin...then again, so did the Pharisees.

I didn't say the most important part of the parable was sexual sin. Nor did I actually quote the whole parable. I quoted a specific directive from the Lord to not sin. That is all.
« Last Edit: November 04, 2009, 01:02:16 AM by Ukiemeister » Logged

"Christianity is not a philosophy, not a doctrine, but life." - Elder Sophrony (Sakharov)
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #542 on: November 04, 2009, 01:05:57 AM »

Tell me what you think Christ would have said if the Pharisees had brought forth to him a pair of monogamous homosexual lovers? Would he have judged and condemned them? Told them their love was invalid and wrong? "You can't love each other. Stop loving each other and force yourself to love people of the opposite sex instead, or don't love at all." That doesn't sound very Christ-like at all in my opinion.

"Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more." John 8:11

How do you know he wouldn't have said, 'Love one another as I have loved you' John 15:12?

I don't. But in reference to a sexual sin, He said "Sin no more." Therefore I identified a quote from a similiar context.

Interesting how the entire point of the parable was a condemnation of judging the actions of others and, yet, you seem to think the important part was about sexual sin...then again, so did the Pharisees.

I didn't say the most important part of the parable was sexual sin. Nor did I actually quote the whole parable. I quoted a specific directive from the Lord to not sin. That is all.

And, yet, you did so without offering any textual evidence that Jesus was actually opposed to homosexuality, yes we know Judaic law was and we know Paul was, but the historical Jesus was something of a social revolutionary...it's not really fair to go around putting words in his mouth when you don't really know what he believed about the matter.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
John of the North
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christianity
Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Edmonton and the West
Posts: 3,533


Christ is Risen!

tgild
« Reply #543 on: November 04, 2009, 01:08:51 AM »

And, yet, you did so without offering any textual evidence that Jesus was actually opposed to homosexuality, yes we know Judaic law was and we know Paul was, but the historical Jesus was something of a social revolutionary...it's not really fair to go around putting words in his mouth when you don't really know what he believed about the matter.

You are correct. I hereby retract the above.
Logged

"Christianity is not a philosophy, not a doctrine, but life." - Elder Sophrony (Sakharov)
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,407


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #544 on: November 04, 2009, 01:23:54 AM »

Tell me what you think Christ would have said if the Pharisees had brought forth to him a pair of monogamous homosexual lovers? Would he have judged and condemned them? Told them their love was invalid and wrong? "You can't love each other. Stop loving each other and force yourself to love people of the opposite sex instead, or don't love at all." That doesn't sound very Christ-like at all in my opinion.

"Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more." John 8:11

How do you know he wouldn't have said, 'Love one another as I have loved you' John 15:12?

I don't. But in reference to a sexual sin, He said "Sin no more." Therefore I identified a quote from a similiar context.

Interesting how the entire point of the parable was a condemnation of judging the actions of others and, yet, you seem to think the important part was about sexual sin...then again, so did the Pharisees.

I didn't say the most important part of the parable was sexual sin. Nor did I actually quote the whole parable. I quoted a specific directive from the Lord to not sin. That is all.

And, yet, you did so without offering any textual evidence that Jesus was actually opposed to homosexuality, yes we know Judaic law was and we know Paul was, but the historical Jesus was something of a social revolutionary...it's not really fair to go around putting words in his mouth when you don't really know what he believed about the matter.

The "historical Jesus" is the Jesus that is worshiped and followed by Orthodox Christians. As Orthodox Christians, we do not pit St. Paul against Our Lord, or Our Lord against the prophets of the Old Testament. Apart from the Orthodox Church, one can create their own subjective "Jesus" and make him into any idol they wish. But to do so is a great danger, and leads to all mannner of heresies and evil.

Christ Our Lord is the Author of the sacred Scriptures, and thus we must understand everything in the Bible in the Light of Orthodox teaching and Tradition. We cannot pick and choose certain teachings of Christ that accomodate our own personal worldview and discard the rest. That is not Orthdox. (And I do realize that you may not be Orthodox, so I am simply reiterating our Orthodox position.)

On a personal note, I must say that I always find it extremely offensive when people try to equate homosexual marriage with the civil rights movement. I am a "white" man who is married to an African American woman. We have three children. We live in Mississippi, and my father-in-law has lived through some of the most egregious forms of prejudice and racism that you could imagine. Homosexuals have not been used as chattel slaves, they have not been forced to live in the inhumane conditions of a segregated society, they have not been routinely lyched, and they do not experience oppression because of an inherent physical trait that cannot be changed. Homosexuals have every right that anyone else has in this society. So this is not the great social justice or human rights issue of our time. If you really want to know who is truly being oppressed, tortured, brutalized without any recourse to the law, it's the unborn children in the womb. Abortion is the great human rights issue of our day, and Dr. King would be saying the same if he hadn't been so brutally assassinated.

Selam  
« Last Edit: November 04, 2009, 01:26:02 AM by Gebre Menfes Kidus » Logged

"Don't register. Don't vote.
Don't enlist. Don't deploy.
Don't take oaths. Don't say the pledge.
Pray to God, and start a revolution instead!"
Selam, +GMK+
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #545 on: November 04, 2009, 01:49:23 AM »

Tell me what you think Christ would have said if the Pharisees had brought forth to him a pair of monogamous homosexual lovers? Would he have judged and condemned them? Told them their love was invalid and wrong? "You can't love each other. Stop loving each other and force yourself to love people of the opposite sex instead, or don't love at all." That doesn't sound very Christ-like at all in my opinion.

"Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more." John 8:11

How do you know he wouldn't have said, 'Love one another as I have loved you' John 15:12?

I don't. But in reference to a sexual sin, He said "Sin no more." Therefore I identified a quote from a similiar context.

Interesting how the entire point of the parable was a condemnation of judging the actions of others and, yet, you seem to think the important part was about sexual sin...then again, so did the Pharisees.

I didn't say the most important part of the parable was sexual sin. Nor did I actually quote the whole parable. I quoted a specific directive from the Lord to not sin. That is all.

And, yet, you did so without offering any textual evidence that Jesus was actually opposed to homosexuality, yes we know Judaic law was and we know Paul was, but the historical Jesus was something of a social revolutionary...it's not really fair to go around putting words in his mouth when you don't really know what he believed about the matter.

The "historical Jesus" is the Jesus that is worshiped and followed by Orthodox Christians. As Orthodox Christians, we do not pit St. Paul against Our Lord, or Our Lord against the prophets of the Old Testament. Apart from the Orthodox Church, one can create their own subjective "Jesus" and make him into any idol they wish. But to do so is a great danger, and leads to all mannner of heresies and evil.

Christ Our Lord is the Author of the sacred Scriptures, and thus we must understand everything in the Bible in the Light of Orthodox teaching and Tradition. We cannot pick and choose certain teachings of Christ that accomodate our own personal worldview and discard the rest. That is not Orthdox. (And I do realize that you may not be Orthodox, so I am simply reiterating our Orthodox position.)

Rather than putting words in people's mouth why not just stick to the documentation? Feel free to say that your church teaches x, y, and z. But there is no record of Jesus' position on homosexuality, if it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside to think he agreed with you, fine...but to state it as though it were a fact, that's just being dishonest.

Quote
On a personal note, I must say that I always find it extremely offensive when people try to equate homosexual marriage with the civil rights movement. I am a "white" man who is married to an African American woman. We have three children. We live in Mississippi, and my father-in-law has lived through some of the most egregious forms of prejudice and racism that you could imagine. Homosexuals have not been used as chattel slaves, they have not been forced to live in the inhumane conditions of a segregated society, they have not been routinely lyched, and they do not experience oppression because of an inherent physical trait that cannot be changed. Homosexuals have every right that anyone else has in this society. So this is not the great social justice or human rights issue of our time. If you really want to know who is truly being oppressed, tortured, brutalized without any recourse to the law, it's the unborn children in the womb. Abortion is the great human rights issue of our day, and Dr. King would be saying the same if he hadn't been so brutally assassinated.

I'm a pretty offensive person, so, not to be too frank about it, but I don't really care if my opinions offend you; that's the great thing about freedom of speech. Furthermore, this whole dishonesty thing's getting pretty tiresome: 'Homosexuals...have not been routinely lyched, and they do not experience oppression because of an inherent physical trait that cannot be changed.' I mean, you have access to the internet and all, don't you? Google can provide you with hundreds of stories of homosexuals being lynched, many of them sanctioned by states in which they had the misfortune of living. And oppression has not always been confined to other countries, we've had our fair share of murders here in the West and not too long ago it was even sanctioned by Western states. Alan Turing committed suicide most likely due to depression caused by forced hormone therapy in England, forced on him for being gay, a great shame as he was one of the most brilliant minds of the 20th century...to cause his life to end early was perhaps one of the greatest crimes against all of humanity in history.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,407


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #546 on: November 04, 2009, 01:59:27 AM »

Tell me what you think Christ would have said if the Pharisees had brought forth to him a pair of monogamous homosexual lovers? Would he have judged and condemned them? Told them their love was invalid and wrong? "You can't love each other. Stop loving each other and force yourself to love people of the opposite sex instead, or don't love at all." That doesn't sound very Christ-like at all in my opinion.

"Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more." John 8:11

How do you know he wouldn't have said, 'Love one another as I have loved you' John 15:12?

I don't. But in reference to a sexual sin, He said "Sin no more." Therefore I identified a quote from a similiar context.

Interesting how the entire point of the parable was a condemnation of judging the actions of others and, yet, you seem to think the important part was about sexual sin...then again, so did the Pharisees.

I didn't say the most important part of the parable was sexual sin. Nor did I actually quote the whole parable. I quoted a specific directive from the Lord to not sin. That is all.

And, yet, you did so without offering any textual evidence that Jesus was actually opposed to homosexuality, yes we know Judaic law was and we know Paul was, but the historical Jesus was something of a social revolutionary...it's not really fair to go around putting words in his mouth when you don't really know what he believed about the matter.

The "historical Jesus" is the Jesus that is worshiped and followed by Orthodox Christians. As Orthodox Christians, we do not pit St. Paul against Our Lord, or Our Lord against the prophets of the Old Testament. Apart from the Orthodox Church, one can create their own subjective "Jesus" and make him into any idol they wish. But to do so is a great danger, and leads to all mannner of heresies and evil.

Christ Our Lord is the Author of the sacred Scriptures, and thus we must understand everything in the Bible in the Light of Orthodox teaching and Tradition. We cannot pick and choose certain teachings of Christ that accomodate our own personal worldview and discard the rest. That is not Orthdox. (And I do realize that you may not be Orthodox, so I am simply reiterating our Orthodox position.)

Rather than putting words in people's mouth why not just stick to the documentation? Feel free to say that your church teaches x, y, and z. But there is no record of Jesus' position on homosexuality, if it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside to think he agreed with you, fine...but to state it as though it were a fact, that's just being dishonest.

Quote
On a personal note, I must say that I always find it extremely offensive when people try to equate homosexual marriage with the civil rights movement. I am a "white" man who is married to an African American woman. We have three children. We live in Mississippi, and my father-in-law has lived through some of the most egregious forms of prejudice and racism that you could imagine. Homosexuals have not been used as chattel slaves, they have not been forced to live in the inhumane conditions of a segregated society, they have not been routinely lyched, and they do not experience oppression because of an inherent physical trait that cannot be changed. Homosexuals have every right that anyone else has in this society. So this is not the great social justice or human rights issue of our time. If you really want to know who is truly being oppressed, tortured, brutalized without any recourse to the law, it's the unborn children in the womb. Abortion is the great human rights issue of our day, and Dr. King would be saying the same if he hadn't been so brutally assassinated.

I'm a pretty offensive person, so, not to be too frank about it, but I don't really care if my opinions offend you; that's the great thing about freedom of speech. Furthermore, this whole dishonesty thing's getting pretty tiresome: 'Homosexuals...have not been routinely lyched, and they do not experience oppression because of an inherent physical trait that cannot be changed.' I mean, you have access to the internet and all, don't you? Google can provide you with hundreds of stories of homosexuals being lynched, many of them sanctioned by states in which they had the misfortune of living. And oppression has not always been confined to other countries, we've had our fair share of murders here in the West and not too long ago it was even sanctioned by Western states. Alan Turing committed suicide most likely due to depression caused by forced hormone therapy in England, forced on him for being gay, a great shame as he was one of the most brilliant minds of the 20th century...to cause his life to end early was perhaps one of the greatest crimes against all of humanity in history.

Orthodoxy does not condone homosexuality, not does it condemn homosexuals. Now, if you feel so strongly about justifying homosexual behavior, promoting homosexual marriage, and proliferating homosexaul propaganda, then leave Orthodoxy alone and go start a cult and worship the idolatrous sodomite hippie "Jesus" of your own vain imagination.

Selam
Logged

"Don't register. Don't vote.
Don't enlist. Don't deploy.
Don't take oaths. Don't say the pledge.
Pray to God, and start a revolution instead!"
Selam, +GMK+
John of the North
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christianity
Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Edmonton and the West
Posts: 3,533


Christ is Risen!

tgild
« Reply #547 on: November 04, 2009, 02:00:30 AM »

Tell me what you think Christ would have said if the Pharisees had brought forth to him a pair of monogamous homosexual lovers? Would he have judged and condemned them? Told them their love was invalid and wrong? "You can't love each other. Stop loving each other and force yourself to love people of the opposite sex instead, or don't love at all." That doesn't sound very Christ-like at all in my opinion.

"Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more." John 8:11

How do you know he wouldn't have said, 'Love one another as I have loved you' John 15:12?

I don't. But in reference to a sexual sin, He said "Sin no more." Therefore I identified a quote from a similiar context.

Interesting how the entire point of the parable was a condemnation of judging the actions of others and, yet, you seem to think the important part was about sexual sin...then again, so did the Pharisees.

I didn't say the most important part of the parable was sexual sin. Nor did I actually quote the whole parable. I quoted a specific directive from the Lord to not sin. That is all.

And, yet, you did so without offering any textual evidence that Jesus was actually opposed to homosexuality, yes we know Judaic law was and we know Paul was, but the historical Jesus was something of a social revolutionary...it's not really fair to go around putting words in his mouth when you don't really know what he believed about the matter.

The "historical Jesus" is the Jesus that is worshiped and followed by Orthodox Christians. As Orthodox Christians, we do not pit St. Paul against Our Lord, or Our Lord against the prophets of the Old Testament. Apart from the Orthodox Church, one can create their own subjective "Jesus" and make him into any idol they wish. But to do so is a great danger, and leads to all mannner of heresies and evil.

Christ Our Lord is the Author of the sacred Scriptures, and thus we must understand everything in the Bible in the Light of Orthodox teaching and Tradition. We cannot pick and choose certain teachings of Christ that accomodate our own personal worldview and discard the rest. That is not Orthdox. (And I do realize that you may not be Orthodox, so I am simply reiterating our Orthodox position.)

Rather than putting words in people's mouth why not just stick to the documentation? Feel free to say that your church teaches x, y, and z. But there is no record of Jesus' position on homosexuality, if it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside to think he agreed with you, fine...but to state it as though it were a fact, that's just being dishonest.

Quote
On a personal note, I must say that I always find it extremely offensive when people try to equate homosexual marriage with the civil rights movement. I am a "white" man who is married to an African American woman. We have three children. We live in Mississippi, and my father-in-law has lived through some of the most egregious forms of prejudice and racism that you could imagine. Homosexuals have not been used as chattel slaves, they have not been forced to live in the inhumane conditions of a segregated society, they have not been routinely lyched, and they do not experience oppression because of an inherent physical trait that cannot be changed. Homosexuals have every right that anyone else has in this society. So this is not the great social justice or human rights issue of our time. If you really want to know who is truly being oppressed, tortured, brutalized without any recourse to the law, it's the unborn children in the womb. Abortion is the great human rights issue of our day, and Dr. King would be saying the same if he hadn't been so brutally assassinated.

I'm a pretty offensive person, so, not to be too frank about it, but I don't really care if my opinions offend you; that's the great thing about freedom of speech. Furthermore, this whole dishonesty thing's getting pretty tiresome: 'Homosexuals...have not been routinely lyched, and they do not experience oppression because of an inherent physical trait that cannot be changed.' I mean, you have access to the internet and all, don't you? Google can provide you with hundreds of stories of homosexuals being lynched, many of them sanctioned by states in which they had the misfortune of living. And oppression has not always been confined to other countries, we've had our fair share of murders here in the West and not too long ago it was even sanctioned by Western states. Alan Turing committed suicide most likely due to depression caused by forced hormone therapy in England, forced on him for being gay, a great shame as he was one of the most brilliant minds of the 20th century...to cause his life to end early was perhaps one of the greatest crimes against all of humanity in history.

Orthodoxy does not condone homosexuality, not does it condemn homosexuals. Now, if you feel so strongly about justifying homosexual behavior, promoting homosexual marriage, and proliferating homosexaul propaganda, then leave Orthodoxy alone and go start a cult and worship the idolatrous sodomite hippie "Jesus" of your own vain imagination.

Selam

Gebre. Unspoken forum rule: do not bait GiC. Do not let him get to you.
Logged

"Christianity is not a philosophy, not a doctrine, but life." - Elder Sophrony (Sakharov)
Feanor
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 205



« Reply #548 on: November 04, 2009, 02:02:35 AM »

On a personal note, I must say that I always find it extremely offensive when people try to equate homosexual marriage with the civil rights movement. I am a "white" man who is married to an African American woman. We have three children. We live in Mississippi, and my father-in-law has lived through some of the most egregious forms of prejudice and racism that you could imagine. Homosexuals have not been used as chattel slaves, they have not been forced to live in the inhumane conditions of a segregated society, they have not been routinely lyched, and they do not experience oppression because of an inherent physical trait that cannot be changed. Homosexuals have every right that anyone else has in this society. So this is not the great social justice or human rights issue of our time. If you really want to know who is truly being oppressed, tortured, brutalized without any recourse to the law, it's the unborn children in the womb. Abortion is the great human rights issue of our day, and Dr. King would be saying the same if he hadn't been so brutally assassinated.

You think homosexuals haven't been subject to disgusting persecution and discrimination throughout the history of the world? Gays are still persecuted by civil authorities in many parts of the world, executed in others, and ''correctively raped" in some countries. Homosexuals were there with Jews in Auschwitz - over 15,000 gay men and women were killed in the Holocaust, and many more were castrated, beaten, and used in hormone experiments conducted by SS doctors. Homosexuals, including young teenagers, were persecuted, tortured and executed by Christian authorities all throughout the Middle Ages, and today Sharia Law still permits and enables the execution of homosexuals in many countries. Even in countries where homosexuality is legal, gays and lesbians are still subject to bashings, discrimination and bullying. My aunt was an open lesbian at age sixteen, and was brutally bashed by several older boys from her rural community. A gay boy at the school I went to was regularly bullied by homophobic students, and the school did nothing to protect him - yet when a white student called a black student a 'black cunt' he was expelled. It was a definite double-standard. Homosexuals have been persecuted and harrassed greatly throughout history, and the church's condemnation of them is just an example of this. Do I need to remind you of victims such as Matthew Shepard, among thousands of others, who have been murdered or attacked in your very own society?

And NO, homosexuals do NOT have 'every right that anyone else has in this society.' They can't get married, even by secular civil authorities in a registrry office, far away from any conservative church. That's discrimination.

If Christians are not willing to grand homosexuals permission to marry within their church, they should at least defend their right to be safe, welcomed and accepted within secular society. It's not an issue you can dismiss and still call yourself a follower of Jesus Christ - the same applies to all human rights causes, whether they are racism, abortion, capital punishment, women's rights, slavery, human trafficking, etc.
« Last Edit: November 04, 2009, 02:03:57 AM by Feanor » Logged
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #549 on: November 04, 2009, 02:05:02 AM »

Tell me what you think Christ would have said if the Pharisees had brought forth to him a pair of monogamous homosexual lovers? Would he have judged and condemned them? Told them their love was invalid and wrong? "You can't love each other. Stop loving each other and force yourself to love people of the opposite sex instead, or don't love at all." That doesn't sound very Christ-like at all in my opinion.

"Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more." John 8:11

How do you know he wouldn't have said, 'Love one another as I have loved you' John 15:12?

I don't. But in reference to a sexual sin, He said "Sin no more." Therefore I identified a quote from a similiar context.

Interesting how the entire point of the parable was a condemnation of judging the actions of others and, yet, you seem to think the important part was about sexual sin...then again, so did the Pharisees.

I didn't say the most important part of the parable was sexual sin. Nor did I actually quote the whole parable. I quoted a specific directive from the Lord to not sin. That is all.

And, yet, you did so without offering any textual evidence that Jesus was actually opposed to homosexuality, yes we know Judaic law was and we know Paul was, but the historical Jesus was something of a social revolutionary...it's not really fair to go around putting words in his mouth when you don't really know what he believed about the matter.

The "historical Jesus" is the Jesus that is worshiped and followed by Orthodox Christians. As Orthodox Christians, we do not pit St. Paul against Our Lord, or Our Lord against the prophets of the Old Testament. Apart from the Orthodox Church, one can create their own subjective "Jesus" and make him into any idol they wish. But to do so is a great danger, and leads to all mannner of heresies and evil.

Christ Our Lord is the Author of the sacred Scriptures, and thus we must understand everything in the Bible in the Light of Orthodox teaching and Tradition. We cannot pick and choose certain teachings of Christ that accomodate our own personal worldview and discard the rest. That is not Orthdox. (And I do realize that you may not be Orthodox, so I am simply reiterating our Orthodox position.)

Rather than putting words in people's mouth why not just stick to the documentation? Feel free to say that your church teaches x, y, and z. But there is no record of Jesus' position on homosexuality, if it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside to think he agreed with you, fine...but to state it as though it were a fact, that's just being dishonest.

Quote
On a personal note, I must say that I always find it extremely offensive when people try to equate homosexual marriage with the civil rights movement. I am a "white" man who is married to an African American woman. We have three children. We live in Mississippi, and my father-in-law has lived through some of the most egregious forms of prejudice and racism that you could imagine. Homosexuals have not been used as chattel slaves, they have not been forced to live in the inhumane conditions of a segregated society, they have not been routinely lyched, and they do not experience oppression because of an inherent physical trait that cannot be changed. Homosexuals have every right that anyone else has in this society. So this is not the great social justice or human rights issue of our time. If you really want to know who is truly being oppressed, tortured, brutalized without any recourse to the law, it's the unborn children in the womb. Abortion is the great human rights issue of our day, and Dr. King would be saying the same if he hadn't been so brutally assassinated.

I'm a pretty offensive person, so, not to be too frank about it, but I don't really care if my opinions offend you; that's the great thing about freedom of speech. Furthermore, this whole dishonesty thing's getting pretty tiresome: 'Homosexuals...have not been routinely lyched, and they do not experience oppression because of an inherent physical trait that cannot be changed.' I mean, you have access to the internet and all, don't you? Google can provide you with hundreds of stories of homosexuals being lynched, many of them sanctioned by states in which they had the misfortune of living. And oppression has not always been confined to other countries, we've had our fair share of murders here in the West and not too long ago it was even sanctioned by Western states. Alan Turing committed suicide most likely due to depression caused by forced hormone therapy in England, forced on him for being gay, a great shame as he was one of the most brilliant minds of the 20th century...to cause his life to end early was perhaps one of the greatest crimes against all of humanity in history.

Orthodoxy does not condone homosexuality, not does it condemn homosexuals. Now, if you feel so strongly about justifying homosexual behavior, promoting homosexual marriage, and proliferating homosexaul propaganda, then leave Orthodoxy alone and go start a cult and worship the idolatrous sodomite hippie "Jesus" of your own vain imagination.

Selam

Well, being a cult leader could be fun...but I just settled for atheism. I know, kinda boring, but what can I say? If I was that interesting I wouldn't be spending time on an internet forum.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #550 on: November 04, 2009, 02:07:36 AM »

Tell me what you think Christ would have said if the Pharisees had brought forth to him a pair of monogamous homosexual lovers? Would he have judged and condemned them? Told them their love was invalid and wrong? "You can't love each other. Stop loving each other and force yourself to love people of the opposite sex instead, or don't love at all." That doesn't sound very Christ-like at all in my opinion.

"Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more." John 8:11

How do you know he wouldn't have said, 'Love one another as I have loved you' John 15:12?

I don't. But in reference to a sexual sin, He said "Sin no more." Therefore I identified a quote from a similiar context.

Interesting how the entire point of the parable was a condemnation of judging the actions of others and, yet, you seem to think the important part was about sexual sin...then again, so did the Pharisees.

I didn't say the most important part of the parable was sexual sin. Nor did I actually quote the whole parable. I quoted a specific directive from the Lord to not sin. That is all.

And, yet, you did so without offering any textual evidence that Jesus was actually opposed to homosexuality, yes we know Judaic law was and we know Paul was, but the historical Jesus was something of a social revolutionary...it's not really fair to go around putting words in his mouth when you don't really know what he believed about the matter.

The "historical Jesus" is the Jesus that is worshiped and followed by Orthodox Christians. As Orthodox Christians, we do not pit St. Paul against Our Lord, or Our Lord against the prophets of the Old Testament. Apart from the Orthodox Church, one can create their own subjective "Jesus" and make him into any idol they wish. But to do so is a great danger, and leads to all mannner of heresies and evil.

Christ Our Lord is the Author of the sacred Scriptures, and thus we must understand everything in the Bible in the Light of Orthodox teaching and Tradition. We cannot pick and choose certain teachings of Christ that accomodate our own personal worldview and discard the rest. That is not Orthdox. (And I do realize that you may not be Orthodox, so I am simply reiterating our Orthodox position.)

Rather than putting words in people's mouth why not just stick to the documentation? Feel free to say that your church teaches x, y, and z. But there is no record of Jesus' position on homosexuality, if it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside to think he agreed with you, fine...but to state it as though it were a fact, that's just being dishonest.

Quote
On a personal note, I must say that I always find it extremely offensive when people try to equate homosexual marriage with the civil rights movement. I am a "white" man who is married to an African American woman. We have three children. We live in Mississippi, and my father-in-law has lived through some of the most egregious forms of prejudice and racism that you could imagine. Homosexuals have not been used as chattel slaves, they have not been forced to live in the inhumane conditions of a segregated society, they have not been routinely lyched, and they do not experience oppression because of an inherent physical trait that cannot be changed. Homosexuals have every right that anyone else has in this society. So this is not the great social justice or human rights issue of our time. If you really want to know who is truly being oppressed, tortured, brutalized without any recourse to the law, it's the unborn children in the womb. Abortion is the great human rights issue of our day, and Dr. King would be saying the same if he hadn't been so brutally assassinated.

I'm a pretty offensive person, so, not to be too frank about it, but I don't really care if my opinions offend you; that's the great thing about freedom of speech. Furthermore, this whole dishonesty thing's getting pretty tiresome: 'Homosexuals...have not been routinely lyched, and they do not experience oppression because of an inherent physical trait that cannot be changed.' I mean, you have access to the internet and all, don't you? Google can provide you with hundreds of stories of homosexuals being lynched, many of them sanctioned by states in which they had the misfortune of living. And oppression has not always been confined to other countries, we've had our fair share of murders here in the West and not too long ago it was even sanctioned by Western states. Alan Turing committed suicide most likely due to depression caused by forced hormone therapy in England, forced on him for being gay, a great shame as he was one of the most brilliant minds of the 20th century...to cause his life to end early was perhaps one of the greatest crimes against all of humanity in history.

Orthodoxy does not condone homosexuality, not does it condemn homosexuals. Now, if you feel so strongly about justifying homosexual behavior, promoting homosexual marriage, and proliferating homosexaul propaganda, then leave Orthodoxy alone and go start a cult and worship the idolatrous sodomite hippie "Jesus" of your own vain imagination.

Selam

Gebre. Unspoken forum rule: do not bait GiC. Do not let him get to you.

You just broke another unspoken rule, don't speak about unspoken rules...because then they're not unspoken anymore, plus it ruins my fun. Wink
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
John of the North
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christianity
Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Edmonton and the West
Posts: 3,533


Christ is Risen!

tgild
« Reply #551 on: November 04, 2009, 02:09:45 AM »

On a personal note, I must say that I always find it extremely offensive when people try to equate homosexual marriage with the civil rights movement. I am a "white" man who is married to an African American woman. We have three children. We live in Mississippi, and my father-in-law has lived through some of the most egregious forms of prejudice and racism that you could imagine. Homosexuals have not been used as chattel slaves, they have not been forced to live in the inhumane conditions of a segregated society, they have not been routinely lyched, and they do not experience oppression because of an inherent physical trait that cannot be changed. Homosexuals have every right that anyone else has in this society. So this is not the great social justice or human rights issue of our time. If you really want to know who is truly being oppressed, tortured, brutalized without any recourse to the law, it's the unborn children in the womb. Abortion is the great human rights issue of our day, and Dr. King would be saying the same if he hadn't been so brutally assassinated.

You think homosexuals haven't been subject to disgusting persecution and discrimination throughout the history of the world? Gays are still persecuted by civil authorities in many parts of the world, executed in others, and ''correctively raped" in some countries. Homosexuals were there with Jews in Auschwitz - over 15,000 gay men and women were killed in the Holocaust, and many more were castrated, beaten, and used in hormone experiments conducted by SS doctors. Homosexuals, including young teenagers, were persecuted, tortured and executed by Christian authorities all throughout the Middle Ages, and today Sharia Law still permits and enables the execution of homosexuals in many countries. Even in countries where homosexuality is legal, gays and lesbians are still subject to bashings, discrimination and bullying. My aunt was an open lesbian at age sixteen, and was brutally bashed by several older boys from her rural community. A gay boy at the school I went to was regularly bullied by homophobic students, and the school did nothing to protect him - yet when a white student called a black student a 'black cunt' he was expelled. It was a definite double-standard. Homosexuals have been persecuted and harrassed greatly throughout history, and the church's condemnation of them is just an example of this. Do I need to remind you of victims such as Matthew Shepard, among thousands of others, who have been murdered or attacked in your very own society?

And NO, homosexuals do NOT have 'every right that anyone else has in this society.' They can't get married, even by secular civil authorities in a registrry office, far away from any conservative church. That's discrimination.

If Christians are not willing to grand homosexuals permission to marry within their church, they should at least defend their right to be safe, welcomed and accepted within secular society. It's not an issue you can dismiss and still call yourself a follower of Jesus Christ - the same applies to all human rights causes, whether they are racism, abortion, capital punishment, women's rights, slavery, human trafficking, etc.

Rights, rights, rights....


We have a politics board here for a reason.
Logged

"Christianity is not a philosophy, not a doctrine, but life." - Elder Sophrony (Sakharov)
Super Apostolic Bros.
Is St. Andrew Luigi to St. Peter's Mario?
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 227



« Reply #552 on: November 04, 2009, 02:10:35 AM »

If the Church's way is too harsh for you, well, atheism lets you do whatever you want and I hear that's quite popular these days.

Hey, I'm supposed to be the only one proselytizing for Atheism, but thanks for the assist. Wink


I expect a little bit of reciprocity. If any of your brethren begin mumbling positive things about God, send him our way...
Logged
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,407


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #553 on: November 04, 2009, 02:10:46 AM »

On a personal note, I must say that I always find it extremely offensive when people try to equate homosexual marriage with the civil rights movement. I am a "white" man who is married to an African American woman. We have three children. We live in Mississippi, and my father-in-law has lived through some of the most egregious forms of prejudice and racism that you could imagine. Homosexuals have not been used as chattel slaves, they have not been forced to live in the inhumane conditions of a segregated society, they have not been routinely lyched, and they do not experience oppression because of an inherent physical trait that cannot be changed. Homosexuals have every right that anyone else has in this society. So this is not the great social justice or human rights issue of our time. If you really want to know who is truly being oppressed, tortured, brutalized without any recourse to the law, it's the unborn children in the womb. Abortion is the great human rights issue of our day, and Dr. King would be saying the same if he hadn't been so brutally assassinated.

You think homosexuals haven't been subject to disgusting persecution and discrimination throughout the history of the world? Gays are still persecuted by civil authorities in many parts of the world, executed in others, and ''correctively raped" in some countries. Homosexuals were there with Jews in Auschwitz - over 15,000 gay men and women were killed in the Holocaust, and many more were castrated, beaten, and used in hormone experiments conducted by SS doctors. Homosexuals, including young teenagers, were persecuted, tortured and executed by Christian authorities all throughout the Middle Ages, and today Sharia Law still permits and enables the execution of homosexuals in many countries. Even in countries where homosexuality is legal, gays and lesbians are still subject to bashings, discrimination and bullying. My aunt was an open lesbian at age sixteen, and was brutally bashed by several older boys from her rural community. A gay boy at the school I went to was regularly bullied by homophobic students, and the school did nothing to protect him - yet when a white student called a black student a 'black cunt' he was expelled. It was a definite double-standard. Homosexuals have been persecuted and harrassed greatly throughout history, and the church's condemnation of them is just an example of this. Do I need to remind you of victims such as Matthew Shepard, among thousands of others, who have been murdered or attacked in your very own society?

And NO, homosexuals do NOT have 'every right that anyone else has in this society.' They can't get married, even by secular civil authorities in a registrry office, far away from any conservative church. That's discrimination.

If Christians are not willing to grand homosexuals permission to marry within their church, they should at least defend their right to be safe, welcomed and accepted within secular society. It's not an issue you can dismiss and still call yourself a follower of Jesus Christ - the same applies to all human rights causes, whether they are racism, abortion, capital punishment, women's rights, slavery, human trafficking, etc.

Christians have been persecuted as much as - if not more so - than homosexuals.

Look, all persecution and inhumane oppression of anyone for any reason is wrong. Why doesn't the homosexual community decry the persecution and torture of Christians around the world?

The Civil Rights movement happened here in America, and the experiences of the homosexual community in America is completely incomparable to the experiences of African Americans in this country who were systematically enslaved, tortured, segregated, and oppressed. That is a fact my friend.

Selam
« Last Edit: November 04, 2009, 02:13:49 AM by Gebre Menfes Kidus » Logged

"Don't register. Don't vote.
Don't enlist. Don't deploy.
Don't take oaths. Don't say the pledge.
Pray to God, and start a revolution instead!"
Selam, +GMK+
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #554 on: November 04, 2009, 02:15:51 AM »

On a personal note, I must say that I always find it extremely offensive when people try to equate homosexual marriage with the civil rights movement. I am a "white" man who is married to an African American woman. We have three children. We live in Mississippi, and my father-in-law has lived through some of the most egregious forms of prejudice and racism that you could imagine. Homosexuals have not been used as chattel slaves, they have not been forced to live in the inhumane conditions of a segregated society, they have not been routinely lyched, and they do not experience oppression because of an inherent physical trait that cannot be changed. Homosexuals have every right that anyone else has in this society. So this is not the great social justice or human rights issue of our time. If you really want to know who is truly being oppressed, tortured, brutalized without any recourse to the law, it's the unborn children in the womb. Abortion is the great human rights issue of our day, and Dr. King would be saying the same if he hadn't been so brutally assassinated.

You think homosexuals haven't been subject to disgusting persecution and discrimination throughout the history of the world? Gays are still persecuted by civil authorities in many parts of the world, executed in others, and ''correctively raped" in some countries. Homosexuals were there with Jews in Auschwitz - over 15,000 gay men and women were killed in the Holocaust, and many more were castrated, beaten, and used in hormone experiments conducted by SS doctors. Homosexuals, including young teenagers, were persecuted, tortured and executed by Christian authorities all throughout the Middle Ages, and today Sharia Law still permits and enables the execution of homosexuals in many countries. Even in countries where homosexuality is legal, gays and lesbians are still subject to bashings, discrimination and bullying. My aunt was an open lesbian at age sixteen, and was brutally bashed by several older boys from her rural community. A gay boy at the school I went to was regularly bullied by homophobic students, and the school did nothing to protect him - yet when a white student called a black student a 'black cunt' he was expelled. It was a definite double-standard. Homosexuals have been persecuted and harrassed greatly throughout history, and the church's condemnation of them is just an example of this. Do I need to remind you of victims such as Matthew Shepard, among thousands of others, who have been murdered or attacked in your very own society?

And NO, homosexuals do NOT have 'every right that anyone else has in this society.' They can't get married, even by secular civil authorities in a registrry office, far away from any conservative church. That's discrimination.

If Christians are not willing to grand homosexuals permission to marry within their church, they should at least defend their right to be safe, welcomed and accepted within secular society. It's not an issue you can dismiss and still call yourself a follower of Jesus Christ - the same applies to all human rights causes, whether they are racism, abortion, capital punishment, women's rights, slavery, human trafficking, etc.

Rights, rights, rights....


We have a politics board here for a reason.

Yeah, them pesky things, don't you just get sick of hearing about them? Wink

Is it just me, Ukie, or have you changed a bit while I've been on sabbatical?
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
John of the North
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christianity
Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Edmonton and the West
Posts: 3,533


Christ is Risen!

tgild
« Reply #555 on: November 04, 2009, 02:17:24 AM »

On a personal note, I must say that I always find it extremely offensive when people try to equate homosexual marriage with the civil rights movement. I am a "white" man who is married to an African American woman. We have three children. We live in Mississippi, and my father-in-law has lived through some of the most egregious forms of prejudice and racism that you could imagine. Homosexuals have not been used as chattel slaves, they have not been forced to live in the inhumane conditions of a segregated society, they have not been routinely lyched, and they do not experience oppression because of an inherent physical trait that cannot be changed. Homosexuals have every right that anyone else has in this society. So this is not the great social justice or human rights issue of our time. If you really want to know who is truly being oppressed, tortured, brutalized without any recourse to the law, it's the unborn children in the womb. Abortion is the great human rights issue of our day, and Dr. King would be saying the same if he hadn't been so brutally assassinated.

You think homosexuals haven't been subject to disgusting persecution and discrimination throughout the history of the world? Gays are still persecuted by civil authorities in many parts of the world, executed in others, and ''correctively raped" in some countries. Homosexuals were there with Jews in Auschwitz - over 15,000 gay men and women were killed in the Holocaust, and many more were castrated, beaten, and used in hormone experiments conducted by SS doctors. Homosexuals, including young teenagers, were persecuted, tortured and executed by Christian authorities all throughout the Middle Ages, and today Sharia Law still permits and enables the execution of homosexuals in many countries. Even in countries where homosexuality is legal, gays and lesbians are still subject to bashings, discrimination and bullying. My aunt was an open lesbian at age sixteen, and was brutally bashed by several older boys from her rural community. A gay boy at the school I went to was regularly bullied by homophobic students, and the school did nothing to protect him - yet when a white student called a black student a 'black cunt' he was expelled. It was a definite double-standard. Homosexuals have been persecuted and harrassed greatly throughout history, and the church's condemnation of them is just an example of this. Do I need to remind you of victims such as Matthew Shepard, among thousands of others, who have been murdered or attacked in your very own society?

And NO, homosexuals do NOT have 'every right that anyone else has in this society.' They can't get married, even by secular civil authorities in a registrry office, far away from any conservative church. That's discrimination.

If Christians are not willing to grand homosexuals permission to marry within their church, they should at least defend their right to be safe, welcomed and accepted within secular society. It's not an issue you can dismiss and still call yourself a follower of Jesus Christ - the same applies to all human rights causes, whether they are racism, abortion, capital punishment, women's rights, slavery, human trafficking, etc.

Rights, rights, rights....


We have a politics board here for a reason.

Yeah, them pesky things, don't you just get sick of hearing about them? Wink

Is it just me, Ukie, or have you changed a bit while I've been on sabbatical?

I have changed. But then, so have you. I can see your change has been for the better, I will leave it up to others to judge myself. Smiley
Logged

"Christianity is not a philosophy, not a doctrine, but life." - Elder Sophrony (Sakharov)
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #556 on: November 04, 2009, 02:18:01 AM »

If the Church's way is too harsh for you, well, atheism lets you do whatever you want and I hear that's quite popular these days.

Hey, I'm supposed to be the only one proselytizing for Atheism, but thanks for the assist. Wink


I expect a little bit of reciprocity. If any of your brethren begin mumbling positive things about God, send him our way...

Don't worry, if they start blathering about that stuff too often, I'd be happy to dump them off on you. Wink
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Salpy
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,835


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #557 on: November 04, 2009, 02:20:39 AM »

Goodness gracious, GIC, you're back!  Where have you been?
Logged

GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #558 on: November 04, 2009, 02:35:48 AM »

Goodness gracious, GIC, you're back!  Where have you been?

Oh...having a real life for a short time, then I moved and started working an excessive number of hours, so here I am! Wink

How's life been treating you?
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Salpy
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,835


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #559 on: November 04, 2009, 02:41:42 AM »

Life's been boring.  Sometimes it's better that way, though.   Smiley
Logged

Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #560 on: November 04, 2009, 03:41:53 AM »

The scriptures and the Church's interpretation of the scriptures on the issue of homosexual relationships are rather clear, I believe.

Relationships yes, mariage - no. There is simply no concept of homosexual marriage in Scripture, like there is no concept of biological evolution, electricity, automobiles, airplanes, protons, neutrons, women having rights independently of fathers or husbands, integrals, differentials, other galaxies...

Marriage seems to me to be a logical extension of relationships in this case.
Logged
yitbsal
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 11


« Reply #561 on: November 04, 2009, 10:04:18 AM »

I think Witega's discussion of the Fathers' knowledge of the passions is right on - "The Fathers *always* recognized that desires arise naturally from the human soul without any action of the will." If there's one thing the ancients knew well it's this, despite not knowing about the concept of genetics, as we know it today.

Again, I think that in general, any Christian, and any potential convert, ought to be very careful about attributing ignorance to Holy Scripture. But even more careful about assuming that we know better today! We might end up being the ignorant ones!

By the way, for an elevated discussion of Christian sexuality, one that goes beyond rights, grievances, conflation of the four loves, etc., I would recommend the following two web sites:

http://eve-tushnet.blogspot.com/
http://johnheard.blogspot.com/

In particular, Eve's article at:

http://www.commonwealmagazine.org/article.php3?id_article=1957
Logged
yitbsal
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 11


« Reply #562 on: November 04, 2009, 10:31:21 AM »

This is why I think that a 'cafeteria Orthodox', one that accepts some doctrine but rejects others, is simply in a transitional period towards complete unbelief. If one cannot, for example, believe scripture and the fathers on their teachings of sexuality, how can one believe their teachings on Christ's divinity, a matter far more fantastic and unbelievable than the teachings on sexuality?!

Well, as one of these people who are, according to your judgment, on their way towards complete unbelief, I might try to answer this. I don't know how, but I just believe their teachings on Christ's divinity (and humanity as well). I think these teachings principally cannot be verified by science. They are outside of the scope of science, like, for example, poetry.

On the other hand, human sexuality is most definitely addressable by science. When people had no idea about genes and genetic determination of sexuality, they could not have possibly conceive that a homosexual simply cannot stop being a homosexual. Similarly, they most certainly thought that once you have physical appearance of a man or a woman, you ARE a man or a woman. Knowing what we now know about transsexuals, we no longer believe that this matter is so simple.

BTW, in patristic sources that I have studied, depression is called a sinful passion, and we are called to fight it in ourselves with the help of prayer and fasting. While prayer and fasting are certainly great, a person with a serotonin imbalance in the brain simply CANNOT be cured of depression unless he or she takes a special medication that inhibits serotonin reuptake. Yet another subject that our dear Fathers could never have predicted...

I think Witega has correctly answered your question about whether the Fathers properly understood sexuality and depression.

On your point about 'outside of the scope of science', I would submit to you that in a sense, either nothing is outside the scope of science and social science or everything is outside the scope of science and social science. Take the example of miracles. We use a combination of science and social science to claim that there's no such thing as a miracle. Science, because we continue to find everyday more and more 'scientific' explanations for phenomena previously unexplained and perhaps attributed to miracles. Hence, science gains more and more credibility as the single source of knowledge. Social science, because psychology and sociology are helping us understand how people are deluded into assuming miracles where there are none.

So I would say that for anyone today to believe in the miracle of Christ's divinity, one has to some extent reject science and social science, or better yet submit them to or sublimate them under Christian belief.

The same for sexuality. Our current scientific understanding, heavily based on evolutionary biology, is that the 'ideal' (let's ignore the definition for now) is intimate relationships of pairs of individuals. Nature has programmed us to desire this, and any other course, such as monasticism, for instance, is unhealthy (the opposite of ideal). This of course goes against the Christian understanding of sexuality. As a Christian, by definition, I submit to the Christian understanding.
Logged
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #563 on: November 04, 2009, 11:46:27 AM »

The same for sexuality. Our current scientific understanding, heavily based on evolutionary biology, is that the 'ideal' (let's ignore the definition for now) is intimate relationships of pairs of individuals. Nature has programmed us to desire this, and any other course, such as monasticism, for instance, is unhealthy (the opposite of ideal). This of course goes against the Christian understanding of sexuality. As a Christian, by definition, I submit to the Christian understanding.

Well, monasticism is hardly "unhealthy" from the point of view of science (not only from the Christian point of view) - FOR THOSE WHO DESIRE IT. There are people who really prefer celibacy. BTW, there are examples of people who were not monastics and yet, according to their own testimony, never engaged in any sexual activity (Immanuel Kant, C.S. Lewis). Sexual abstinence is not in any way unhealthy in and by itself. But for those who do not desire it, and, moreover, CANNOT BEAR IT, monasticism (or "monasticism") is hell. AFAIK, that's exactly why our Lord said in the Gospels, "He that is able to receive it, let him receive it" (Matt. 19:12). And St. Paul advised people, in case they were not like him (who never touched a woman), to "marry rather than to burn."
Logged

Love never fails.
GabrieltheCelt
Hillbilly Extraordinaire
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,990


Chasin' down a Hoodoo...


« Reply #564 on: November 04, 2009, 12:56:48 PM »

I think Witega's discussion of the Fathers' knowledge of the passions is right on - "The Fathers *always* recognized that desires arise naturally from the human soul without any action of the will." If there's one thing the ancients knew well it's this, despite not knowing about the concept of genetics, as we know it today.

Again, I think that in general, any Christian, and any potential convert, ought to be very careful about attributing ignorance to Holy Scripture. But even more careful about assuming that we know better today! We might end up being the ignorant ones!

By the way, for an elevated discussion of Christian sexuality, one that goes beyond rights, grievances, conflation of the four loves, etc., I would recommend the following two web sites:

http://eve-tushnet.blogspot.com/
http://johnheard.blogspot.com/

In particular, Eve's article at:

http://www.commonwealmagazine.org/article.php3?id_article=1957


 Welcome to the forum, yitbsal!  Smiley  BTW, are these links Eastern Orthodox?  And what faith are you a member of?
Logged

"The Scots-Irish; Brewed in Scotland, bottled in Ireland, uncorked in America."  ~Scots-Irish saying
yitbsal
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 11


« Reply #565 on: November 04, 2009, 01:10:02 PM »

The same for sexuality. Our current scientific understanding, heavily based on evolutionary biology, is that the 'ideal' (let's ignore the definition for now) is intimate relationships of pairs of individuals. Nature has programmed us to desire this, and any other course, such as monasticism, for instance, is unhealthy (the opposite of ideal). This of course goes against the Christian understanding of sexuality. As a Christian, by definition, I submit to the Christian understanding.

Well, monasticism is hardly "unhealthy" from the point of view of science (not only from the Christian point of view) - FOR THOSE WHO DESIRE IT. There are people who really prefer celibacy. BTW, there are examples of people who were not monastics and yet, according to their own testimony, never engaged in any sexual activity (Immanuel Kant, C.S. Lewis). Sexual abstinence is not in any way unhealthy in and by itself. But for those who do not desire it, and, moreover, CANNOT BEAR IT, monasticism (or "monasticism") is hell. AFAIK, that's exactly why our Lord said in the Gospels, "He that is able to receive it, let him receive it" (Matt. 19:12). And St. Paul advised people, in case they were not like him (who never touched a woman), to "marry rather than to burn."

Heorhij,

With my 'scientific' hat on, I would say it is highly likely that a person who wants to be a monastic is doing so to hide from or mask other psychological issues that he has not dealt with. I might concede that there might a few, tiny few, asexuals for whom celibacy is ideal, but not monasticism or any kind of ascetism. Monasticism is a psychologically cruel tradition that is best relegated to the ancient dust-bin. This, I would say, is the prevalent scientific position.

Of course, I give monasticism as just one example. Jesus' commandment on divorce is another. Pre-marital sex - from the 'scientific' point of view, I would say that it is almost necessary for understanding one's sexuality and finding the ideal mate - is another. Contraception, to which Christianity does not give moral approval, is another.

Let's also remember that the Christian view of sexuality is, like all other teaching, based on the more fundamental concepts of sin and passion, which one would also consider 'unscientific'.
Logged
yitbsal
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 11


« Reply #566 on: November 04, 2009, 01:20:50 PM »


 Welcome to the forum, yitbsal!  Smiley  BTW, are these links Eastern Orthodox?  And what faith are you a member of?

Thank you, Gabriel. I'm Ethiopian Orthodox. These links are Catholic - well, more precisely, the writers are Catholic. The content, in my opinion, is in agreement with both Oriental and Eastern Orthodox doctrine.
Logged
witega
Is it enough now, to tell you you matter?
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,614


« Reply #567 on: November 04, 2009, 03:09:14 PM »

Well, monasticism is hardly "unhealthy" from the point of view of science (not only from the Christian point of view) - FOR THOSE WHO DESIRE IT. There are people who really prefer celibacy.

Have you ever actually spokent to a monk? Or, as with your mischaracterization of the Fathers' understanding of human sexuality, are you simply projecting your own assumptions? Monks do not become monks because celibacy is easy for them; in fact, for a naturally asexual individual there is little point to taking the monastic vow of celibacy.

The monastic life is all about the restriction or outright suppression of natural human urges. Sex, a full belly, and self-determination at the minimum; in more extreme (but not rare and always highly respected) cases, it extends to suppression of the desire for even such basics as shelter or human interaction. Look at St. Mary of Egypt, whom the church reveres as a great exemplar of the ascetic ideal. No one would confuse her with a 'natural celibate'. And I think you'd have a very hard time finding a secular scientist who considered her way of life 'healthy'. But the Orthodox understanding is that the monk takes the *direct* route to control and then purification of the corrupt natural desires. Not all of us are called to, or strong enough, to pursue such a stark form of the path, but we are all called to the path: 'Be perfect as your Father is perfect'.
Logged

Ariel Starling - New album

For it were better to suffer everything, rather than divide the Church of God. Even martyrdom for the sake of preventing division would not be less glorious than for refusing to worship idols. - St. Dionysius the Great
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #568 on: November 04, 2009, 04:43:25 PM »

Monasticism is a psychologically cruel tradition that is best relegated to the ancient dust-bin. This, I would say, is the prevalent scientific position.

Perhaps; it souds, indeed, like a position of scientists who are philosophically un-believers, un-Christians (or anti-Christians). Personally, I prefer a different take on monasticism: it is not natural but "super-natural," a kind of life people live in order to dedicate more time and effort to serving God, praying for the rest of the world. But it certainly should not be forced on anyone. Again, Christ said, "He that is ABLE to receive it, let him receive it."

Of course, I give monasticism as just one example. Jesus' commandment on divorce is another. Pre-marital sex - from the 'scientific' point of view, I would say that it is almost necessary for understanding one's sexuality and finding the ideal mate - is another. Contraception, to which Christianity does not give moral approval, is another.

Contraception is perhaps a separate issue (I know tat my Church does not have any dogmatic position on it, making it a "pastoral issue"). As for divorce and pre-marital sex, there is a big difference with monasticism: we ALL are expected to be faithful to our spouses (if we have them) as long as we live, and we ALL are expected to to abstain from any kind of extramarital sexual relationships, including pre-marital. But NOT all of us are expected to be unmarried and celibate for as long as we live.

Let's also remember that the Christian view of sexuality is, like all other teaching, based on the more fundamental concepts of sin and passion, which one would also consider 'unscientific'.

Be it as it may, scientific or not, but why is a homosexual person deprived of an option to combat his or her sinful passions in the context of monogamous, committed, loving, lifelong marriage? Again, I do not see a break from the closed circle of tautology: gay sex is bad because it is extramarital, and gay sex will always be extramarital because gay sex is bad and gays cannot marry.
Logged

Love never fails.
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #569 on: November 04, 2009, 04:43:25 PM »

Well, monasticism is hardly "unhealthy" from the point of view of science (not only from the Christian point of view) - FOR THOSE WHO DESIRE IT. There are people who really prefer celibacy.

Have you ever actually spokent to a monk? Or, as with your mischaracterization of the Fathers' understanding of human sexuality, are you simply projecting your own assumptions? Monks do not become monks because celibacy is easy for them; in fact, for a naturally asexual individual there is little point to taking the monastic vow of celibacy.

The monastic life is all about the restriction or outright suppression of natural human urges. Sex, a full belly, and self-determination at the minimum; in more extreme (but not rare and always highly respected) cases, it extends to suppression of the desire for even such basics as shelter or human interaction. Look at St. Mary of Egypt, whom the church reveres as a great exemplar of the ascetic ideal. No one would confuse her with a 'natural celibate'. And I think you'd have a very hard time finding a secular scientist who considered her way of life 'healthy'. But the Orthodox understanding is that the monk takes the *direct* route to control and then purification of the corrupt natural desires. Not all of us are called to, or strong enough, to pursue such a stark form of the path, but we are all called to the path: 'Be perfect as your Father is perfect'.

I know that monks have urges and suppress them. But you are ignoring my main point: monasticism is never IMPOSED on those who do not desire it (regardless of why they DO desire it - be it because of their asexuality or because of their striving to live a passionless life and dedicate all their time to God). The Lord said, very clearly (again): "HE THAT IS ABLE TO RECEIVE IT, LET HIM RECEIVE IT." But when it comes to gays, you impose lifelong celibacy on them, regadless of their ability or inability to receive it.
Logged

Love never fails.
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #570 on: November 04, 2009, 05:25:25 PM »

Quote
Don't we thus spit in the face, humiliate, dehumanize millions and millions of our homosexual brothers and sisters, impose on them something that as few of them can bear (i.e. lifelong chastity) as as few of us heterosexuals can bear?
No.

How many of them told you so? I know many people who are homosexual, men and women. Some of them are Orthodox and post to this forum (I will certainly not name them - but believe me, they are here, too, like everywhere). Not one single one of them says that we do NOT "spit in the face, humiliate, dehumanize millions and millions of our homosexual brothers and sisters, impose on them something that as few of them can bear (i.e. lifelong chastity) as as few of us heterosexuals can bear."
Logged

Love never fails.
yitbsal
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 11


« Reply #571 on: November 05, 2009, 12:03:03 AM »

Heorhij,

To return our discussion back into context, the subject of science was brought up when you said that, put simply, we should maintain our beliefs that do not conflict with science and discard those that do. I and Witega have tried to illustrate that not only our beliefs on sexuality, but most of our Christian beliefs clash with what is considered science today. So if we were to reject our beliefs that clash with science, we should get rid of most of our beliefs, and chiefly the fantastic belief in miracles and Christ's divinity.

If we pick and choose what we accept and what we reject, then at least we should be scientifically consistent. For example, you seem to favour homosexual marriage, but not pre-marital sex. From a scientific perspective, this is inconsistent. Like I said, a 'scientist' would consider pre-marital sex a necessary way of discovering and nurturing one's own sexuality and finding a compatible mate.

I should add that calling church doctrine or teaching an 'imposition' is out of context. After all, the doctrine that pre-marital sex is wrong is just as much of an imposition as the doctrine that homosexual sex is wrong. The word imposition is of no use here. Christianity is chosen, people freely enter and leave the Church, etc. The issue is whether the teachings make sense given Scripture and Tradition.

Which is what you're raising when you ask why gays don't have the same marriage options as heterosexuals. In other words, given the Church's teachings, _why_ does the Church teach what it does. This question, as far as I'm concerned, is similar to any other questions about doctrine - why did God make us, why the need for Christ's death and resurrection, etc. They are questions for which there are answers, to some extent, with the rest left to Mystery.

Having said that, I am no expert in this particular subject, but I suggest that you read the references I provided above, particularly Eve Tushnet's piece on Commonweal. I think these provide the best answers I've seen to date. Also, there's Father Thomas Hopko's book on homosexuality, which I haven't read, but I hear is quite good.

I just want to leave you with one last point. I'd like to reassure you that those of us who believe in the Church's teaching that homosexual desires are disordered understand fully that homosexual relationships are not devoid of agape love. This should go without saying, but there it is. There can be far more agape love (if we can measure love) in such a relationship than in others. But that is not the point... See http://insidecatholic.com/Joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6334&Itemid=48.


Logged
witega
Is it enough now, to tell you you matter?
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,614


« Reply #572 on: November 05, 2009, 02:47:04 AM »

I know that monks have urges and suppress them. But you are ignoring my main point: monasticism is never IMPOSED on those who do not desire it (regardless of why they DO desire it - be it because of their asexuality or because of their striving to live a passionless life and dedicate all their time to God). The Lord said, very clearly (again): "HE THAT IS ABLE TO RECEIVE IT, LET HIM RECEIVE IT." But when it comes to gays, you impose lifelong celibacy on them, regadless of their ability or inability to receive it.

Yes, I have been ignoring it, for two reasons. First off, having already rejected the authority of Scripture and Tradition on the morality of homosexual activity, you cannot logically appeal to the same authorities to justify that rejection (unless of course, you are taking the position of a non-believer like Asteriktos that the authority is internally inconsistent and therefore rejectable as a whole). You started from the position that modern scientific understanding of sexuality and human desire is a legitimate basis on which to reject the traditional teaching/practice of the Church (even though you have failed to at all engage the actual Patristic teaching on 'inborn desires'). So, using *your* logic, I have no reason to respect the tradition that monasticism is not imposed--I could argue that that leniency was based on the 'incorrect belief' that homosexuals have a choice. But now that we know they have no choice we should, for their own good, forcibly cut them off from temptation by sending them off to hermitages or into convents.

Secondly, your point is obviously incorrect. If a heterosexual cannot find someone willing to marry him, the Church *imposes* celibacy. If a priest's wife dies (not so common an issue now, but a depressingly common childbirth event prior to modern medicine), then the Church *imposes* celibacy. We had a member of our parish who had been divorced 3 times and so the Church *imposed* celibacy on him. It's true that the first example can always have hope that things will change, which in some senses makes his lot lighter than that borne by the gay; but it's a difference of magnitude, not of type. And the latter 2 are in the exact same boat.
Logged

Ariel Starling - New album

For it were better to suffer everything, rather than divide the Church of God. Even martyrdom for the sake of preventing division would not be less glorious than for refusing to worship idols. - St. Dionysius the Great
witega
Is it enough now, to tell you you matter?
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,614


« Reply #573 on: November 05, 2009, 02:57:32 AM »

But when it comes to gays, you impose lifelong celibacy on them, regadless of their ability or inability to receive it.

Also, it should be obvious, but since it's apparently not--I (thankfully) have no authority and don't 'impose' celibacy on gays anymore than I impose it on my unmarried acquaintances (or chastity on my married ones). If the topic comes up and someone wants to know my opinion, I will explain the teaching of the Church to the best of my ability as I would on any other topic, but what they do it with it is entirely up to them.
Logged

Ariel Starling - New album

For it were better to suffer everything, rather than divide the Church of God. Even martyrdom for the sake of preventing division would not be less glorious than for refusing to worship idols. - St. Dionysius the Great
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #574 on: November 05, 2009, 09:37:44 AM »

Yes, I have been ignoring it, for two reasons. First off, having already rejected the authority of Scripture and Tradition on the morality of homosexual activity, you cannot logically appeal to the same authorities to justify that rejection (unless of course, you are taking the position of a non-believer like Asteriktos that the authority is internally inconsistent and therefore rejectable as a whole). You started from the position that modern scientific understanding of sexuality and human desire is a legitimate basis on which to reject the traditional teaching/practice of the Church (even though you have failed to at all engage the actual Patristic teaching on 'inborn desires'). So, using *your* logic, I have no reason to respect the tradition that monasticism is not imposed--I could argue that that leniency was based on the 'incorrect belief' that homosexuals have a choice. But now that we know they have no choice we should, for their own good, forcibly cut them off from temptation by sending them off to hermitages or into convents.

I am not rejecting the authority of Scripture and Tradition. What I am trying to say is that the spirit of love should (and will!) prevail over the LETTER of Scripture and Tradition. Again - and this is also what you and some others keep ignoring or down-playing! - for how many centuries Orthodox priests made it so clear to their flock that a person who committed suicide will be buried outside of cemetary walls without ANY service over him/her? And I am sure these priests had a lot to say about how Scripture and Tradition view suicide - as a great sin. But look, now, when we (including them, the priests and their bishops) - simply know a little about how the human brain functions, suicide victims more often than not are buried according to the generally accepted Orthodox rite of Christian burial.

Secondly, your point is obviously incorrect. If a heterosexual cannot find someone willing to marry him, the Church *imposes* celibacy. If a priest's wife dies (not so common an issue now, but a depressingly common childbirth event prior to modern medicine), then the Church *imposes* celibacy. We had a member of our parish who had been divorced 3 times and so the Church *imposed* celibacy on him. It's true that the first example can always have hope that things will change, which in some senses makes his lot lighter than that borne by the gay; but it's a difference of magnitude, not of type. And the latter 2 are in the exact same boat.

I think it is a huge difference when a human being is given a chance. Then you cannot speak of "imposition." Gays are not given any chance, and that's dehumanizing.
Logged

Love never fails.
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #575 on: November 05, 2009, 09:37:45 AM »

Heorhij,
To return our discussion back into context, the subject of science was brought up when you said that, put simply, we should maintain our beliefs that do not conflict with science and discard those that do. I and Witega have tried to illustrate that not only our beliefs on sexuality, but most of our Christian beliefs clash with what is considered science today. So if we were to reject our beliefs that clash with science, we should get rid of most of our beliefs, and chiefly the fantastic belief in miracles and Christ's divinity.

I think that's not so black and white. A few centuries ago, perhaps most Orthodox believers would say that if some weird person discovers that biological species evolve, that notion, as a one clashing with our beliefs, should be immediately rejected. While some "high-brow" theologians interpreted Genesis metaphorically, some 99.999% firmly believed that "things happened exactly the way the Bible says they did." Today, it's different. The Church does not campain against evolution, and a good number of priests, bishops, metropolitans openly say that we should not read Genesis literally. And I believe it's good that it is so. As for the miracles and especially the miracle of Christ two natures and His resurrection - that, I believe, is principally, philosophically outside of the realm of science and "progress." But a lot of other things are within it.

If we pick and choose what we accept and what we reject, then at least we should be scientifically consistent. For example, you seem to favour homosexual marriage, but not pre-marital sex. From a scientific perspective, this is inconsistent. Like I said, a 'scientist' would consider pre-marital sex a necessary way of discovering and nurturing one's own sexuality and finding a compatible mate.

But that would destroy the concept of MONOGAMOUS marriage. True monogamy is when you have one partner for life. People who engage in pre-marital sex usually marry someone who is not their first sexual partner.

I should add that calling church doctrine or teaching an 'imposition' is out of context. After all, the doctrine that pre-marital sex is wrong is just as much of an imposition as the doctrine that homosexual sex is wrong. The word imposition is of no use here. Christianity is chosen, people freely enter and leave the Church, etc. The issue is whether the teachings make sense given Scripture and Tradition.

Which is what you're raising when you ask why gays don't have the same marriage options as heterosexuals. In other words, given the Church's teachings, _why_ does the Church teach what it does. This question, as far as I'm concerned, is similar to any other questions about doctrine - why did God make us, why the need for Christ's death and resurrection, etc. They are questions for which there are answers, to some extent, with the rest left to Mystery.

Yes - but I think that if this "leaving it to Mystery" hurts, humiliates, dehumanizes our brothers and sisters, - we should change our ways regarding that. The Church HAS done it in certain issues (Orthodox burial to suicide victims), so She is absolutely capable of that.

Logged

Love never fails.
katherineofdixie
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 3,449



« Reply #576 on: November 05, 2009, 10:42:58 AM »

One thing I've always wondered is why homosexuality? What makes it different from any other behavior (wired or acquired)?
Logged

"If but ten of us lead a holy life, we shall kindle a fire which shall light up the entire city."

 St. John Chrysostom
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #577 on: November 05, 2009, 11:14:14 AM »

One thing I've always wondered is why homosexuality? What makes it different from any other behavior (wired or acquired)?

I don't know, but people with other behavior, wired or acquired, are not subject to prohibition to marry. Or am I wrong? Are two fetishists or paraphiliacs of the opposite gender prohoboted from marrying in the Orthodox Church?
Logged

Love never fails.
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #578 on: November 05, 2009, 11:33:54 AM »

One thing I've always wondered is why homosexuality? What makes it different from any other behavior (wired or acquired)?

I don't know, but people with other behavior, wired or acquired, are not subject to prohibition to marry. Or am I wrong? Are two fetishists or paraphiliacs of the opposite gender prohoboted from marrying in the Orthodox Church?

Sorry, typo. Prohibited.
Logged

Love never fails.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,363


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #579 on: November 05, 2009, 12:46:55 PM »

One thing I've always wondered is why homosexuality? What makes it different from any other behavior (wired or acquired)?

I don't know, but people with other behavior, wired or acquired, are not subject to prohibition to marry. Or am I wrong? Are two fetishists or paraphiliacs of the opposite gender prohoboted from marrying in the Orthodox Church?
No one is prohibited from marrying a person of the opposite sex. Everyone is prohibited from marrying a person of the same sex. There is no unfair standard here.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #580 on: November 05, 2009, 12:53:16 PM »

One thing I've always wondered is why homosexuality? What makes it different from any other behavior (wired or acquired)?

I don't know, but people with other behavior, wired or acquired, are not subject to prohibition to marry. Or am I wrong? Are two fetishists or paraphiliacs of the opposite gender prohoboted from marrying in the Orthodox Church?
No one is prohibited from marrying a person of the opposite sex. Everyone is prohibited from marrying a person of the same sex. There is no unfair standard here.

I was just answering Katherine's question about the difference between homosexuality and "any kind of behavior, wired or acquired."
Logged

Love never fails.
LizaSymonenko
Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
Global Moderator
Toumarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: God's Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Posts: 13,469



WWW
« Reply #581 on: November 05, 2009, 01:21:06 PM »


I think that's not so black and white. A few centuries ago, perhaps most Orthodox believers would say that if some weird person discovers that biological species evolve, that notion, as a one clashing with our beliefs, should be immediately rejected. While some "high-brow" theologians interpreted Genesis metaphorically, some 99.999% firmly believed that "things happened exactly the way the Bible says they did." Today, it's different. The Church does not campain against evolution, and a good number of priests, bishops, metropolitans openly say that we should not read Genesis literally. And I believe it's good that it is so. As for the miracles and especially the miracle of Christ two natures and His resurrection - that, I believe, is principally, philosophically outside of the realm of science and "progress." But a lot of other things are within it.

Heorhij,

First of all, I love you like a brother.  However, as a sister I must ask you why you find this one point of Orthodoxy so contentious?  You agree that marriage should be a monogamy, and therefore, you argue that premarital sex falls outside the realm of Orthodoxy because it's not monogamous, yet, homosexual marriage is okay, because the couple is monogamous.  Right?  Who says that premarital sex isn't monogamous?  I know a couple who have been "together" for over 10 years, yet, do not wish to marry.  It's not a religious thing with them.  She's simply seen too many messy divorces and she wants no part of it.  What's hers is hers, and his is his, and they live happily together.  I don't agree with their lifestyle and have urged them to get married....even offered to help with the arrangements....but, it's their life.

So, Orthodoxy would frown upon their current "union" and should accept a gay marriage.  How come?

In the eyes of the Church both are wrong.

Orthodoxy is NOT Politically Correct, and I hope it never will be.  The Church, it's morals, and ethics should not change with the times.  The Church is our "Noah's Ark" leading us over the troubled, secular, immoral, storm of life to salvation.  This is the one place we should know we can go and NOT be led astray.

As for Evolution.  Please, tell me you don't know a priest who agrees that mankind evolved from monkeys!  What nonsense!  If you mean "evolution" in the sense that if you crossbreed a short mare with a tall stallion and her offspring are tall....the tall offspring mate with tall horses, .... that the whole breed will become taller....than yes.  That is a fact.  If you mean that birds evolve to survive on a particular pine nut found on the island where they live...okay, that's true too....because that is the only source of food available.  Heck, I evolve into a vegetarian during Lent in order to survive on veggies alone....and then I morph back to a carnivore after Pascha!

However, I for one, do believe the story of Genesis.  I believe that God created Adam and Eve.  I do believe we are all brothers and sisters, not only in Christ, but, in the flesh, as we share the same parents.

Believe me, my heart breaks for the homosexuals in this world.  I don't believe all of them "chose" that lifestyle...although to be frank many do (it seems to be the fad these days).  It's tough.  It's also tough for those who are single in this world.  We've heard from a number of people on this Forum who wish to have someone to love them, and don't.  It's just as tough for these "straight" single people.

Oh well.  That's life.  A person can live without sex.  Nothing will happen to them.

What does bother me...are the people who are in pain constantly, who have cancer, who can't breath, who can't think for the pain they are feeling is so great, who truly suffer....who are scared for their lives.....who are hungry.....who are freezing, or dying of thirst......these things are more of an issue.  These are the things that we have all lost site of because we are all preoccupied with the pretty rainbow colors and parades.

These are the people who are truly suffering, and who's lives are truly miserable.

Please forgive me for my outburst.  I am just so tired of listening to all this talk about "rights".

OK....lunchbreak over.   Back to work!

Wink


Logged

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria
katherineofdixie
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 3,449



« Reply #582 on: November 05, 2009, 01:41:06 PM »

One thing I've always wondered is why homosexuality? What makes it different from any other behavior (wired or acquired)?

I don't know, but people with other behavior, wired or acquired, are not subject to prohibition to marry. Or am I wrong? Are two fetishists or paraphiliacs of the opposite gender prohoboted from marrying in the Orthodox Church?

I don't know. But their behavior is certainly prohibited. So what's the difference?
Logged

"If but ten of us lead a holy life, we shall kindle a fire which shall light up the entire city."

 St. John Chrysostom
ignatius
Baptacathadox
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic > Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,690


My Son Aidan... :-)


« Reply #583 on: November 05, 2009, 01:44:11 PM »

Grace and Peace,

Does the Orthodox Church recognize the identification of human beings as 'homosexual'? I'm asking because I was taught that the Roman Church does not recognize such an identification as substantive. This is 'key' to any 'real' understanding of opposition to recognizing or not recognizing one's 'right to sodomy or any other sexual sin' as normative. If you recognize that homosexuality is a substantive human identity like being male or female etc then it does look to be that you are 'denying' another human being the 'right to relations' and it does appear unfair. I think the goal should be to let whoever you are discussing this with understand that we are 'all' simply human beings with appetites. Some of these appetites can be unhealthy and thus unacceptable to feed. Sodomy and other sexual acts with individuals of the same gender fall into this unacceptable category.

Is this not Orthodox teaching?
Logged

St Basil the Great (330-379 A.D.): “I think then that the one goal of all who are really and truly serving the Lord ought to be to bring back to union the churches who have at different times and in diverse manners divided from one another.”
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,925


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #584 on: November 05, 2009, 01:48:09 PM »

One thing I've always wondered is why homosexuality? What makes it different from any other behavior (wired or acquired)?

I don't know, but people with other behavior, wired or acquired, are not subject to prohibition to marry. Or am I wrong? Are two fetishists or paraphiliacs of the opposite gender prohoboted from marrying in the Orthodox Church?
No one is prohibited from marrying a person of the opposite sex. Everyone is prohibited from marrying a person of the same sex. There is no unfair standard here.
Maybe by your church, but I think we're talking about the authority of our Church here, bud.
Logged
Tags: homosexuality 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 »   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.236 seconds with 74 queries.