(Editor's Note, Bill and I have been discussing homosexuality and the problem of faith for the last few posts. So I encourage you to read Welcome Bill I LGBT Agenda II and Welcome Bill II The Problem of Faith . Susan Fox)
Susan,
Your faith is impressive and your arguments are convincing. It does me no good to try to talk you down. You would not believe just how much of the Bible I consider to be non-factual. In fact, the parts of the Bible that I do consider to be factual convey historical information, only, such as the names of persons and places that did truly exist.
I do believe that Jesus did truly exist and did start a new religion. By the time the gospels were written, the stories about him had been told and retold many times and who knows how
they may have changed before they were written?
I don't want to change the way that you look at life except for your attitude toward homosexuality. Christians in general and Catholics in particular have got to stop referring to a few passages in the Bible that seem to condemn it. They have to just acknowledge that same sex attracted people exist, regardless of the reason, and accept them for who and what they are.
Bill S.
Dear Bill,
You are the kindest person I have ever argued with. Thank you for your gentleness.
Same sex attraction is not a sin. We do accept same sex attracted people for who and what they are. We have no problem with same sex attracted people and in fact, if you know one who is living a chaste life, we would consider him or her to be a saint. I had a girl friend in high school who suffered from SSA, and she was welcomed and loved in my circle of female friends, although none of us had the same orientation. That was over 40 years ago.
However, we do not accept the ACT of homosexuality any more than we accept married contraceptive sex or masturbation. And we do not accept these acts because we love gay people, we love married couples who are contracepting, and we love people who masturbate, and we want them to live in freedom in Christ --- in happiness.
Even if we weren't Christians, one only has to look at the human body to see that men and women are complementary. Men and men are not. I've been married for 30 years. My sexuality is drastically different than my husband's. Men are required to give of themselves in order to adapt to the female sexuality. And women vice versa. This self-giving love nurtures the family and permits a woman to become a wife and mother, a man to become a husband and father. Men with men get instant gratification because both partners desire sex in that same manner. Why is the Red Sea red, and the Dead Sea dead? There is water flowing in and out of the Red Sea, and it is alive, but water only goes one way with the Dead Sea, and it is dying.
Women need wooing, gentleness, and time. Men married to such women have to put aside their selfish desire for instant gratification and grow. Women married to men with the opposite but complementary sexuality have to grow also. From a Christian perspective, this is part of God's plan to make us holy in marriage. But from Nature's point of view, this is simply the way that men and women are made. It is the natural law. Also only women and men can produce children, become fruitful. This is obvious. So one doesn't need Scripture nor the Church to say homosexual acts are unnatural. Nature tells us so.
Read the early Church Fathers. St. Peter and St. Paul were put to death under the Roman emperor Nero before 64 AD. That means that the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts were written before 64 AD because Luke himself tells us that he wrote the Gospel first and he ends the Book of Acts before Paul is put to death. Now that is 30 years from the Ascension of Jesus! Furthermore, Luke is borrowing from the Greek translation of Matthew, who recorded all the sayings of Jesus. Matthew was a tax collector. A tax collector had to keep good records or else the Romans would have put him to death. Long before 50 AD, Matthew's Aramaic sayings of Jesus are published! And Biblical scholars agree that Mark's Gospel, which is the shortest, is the first official translation of Matthew into Greek. And Luke only had that Greek translation from Mark when he wrote his Gospel -- before 64 AD.
In addition, the number of sources to the whole New Testament is more extensive than any other writing of that era. These sources are written in Greek, Latin, Syriac, Coptic and some Aramaic, and yet they all agree. Each source also has its own history of veracity. Even if we had none of the New Testament, we could recreate it from the writings of the early Church Fathers -- beginning with the contemporaries of the Apostles, such as Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna, and Irenaeus of Lyon, Clement of Rome and Ignatius of Antioch.
Surely, finding out whether the Gospels are true or not, and whether our lifestyles conform with the Mind of God would be a good investment of everyone's prayer and study time.
There are two routes, one --- Route 666 -- is broad and wide, easily traveled and takes us to
a shore where time drags and the clock ticks, "Forever, forever, forever..."
The other route is very narrow, Route 333. It is more difficult, requires a lot of suffering, but it takes us to a shore where the Children of God come dancing home in joy and hug Our Father. He puts a ring on our fingers, kills the fatted calf and holds a big party.
Route 333 begins with a encounter with Jesus Christ.
God bless you, Bill. Susan Fox
Susan,
Your faith is impressive and your arguments are convincing. It does me no good to try to talk you down. You would not believe just how much of the Bible I consider to be non-factual. In fact, the parts of the Bible that I do consider to be factual convey historical information, only, such as the names of persons and places that did truly exist.
I do believe that Jesus did truly exist and did start a new religion. By the time the gospels were written, the stories about him had been told and retold many times and who knows how
 |
| Another Great Comment from Bill |
I don't want to change the way that you look at life except for your attitude toward homosexuality. Christians in general and Catholics in particular have got to stop referring to a few passages in the Bible that seem to condemn it. They have to just acknowledge that same sex attracted people exist, regardless of the reason, and accept them for who and what they are.
Bill S.
Dear Bill,
You are the kindest person I have ever argued with. Thank you for your gentleness.
Same sex attraction is not a sin. We do accept same sex attracted people for who and what they are. We have no problem with same sex attracted people and in fact, if you know one who is living a chaste life, we would consider him or her to be a saint. I had a girl friend in high school who suffered from SSA, and she was welcomed and loved in my circle of female friends, although none of us had the same orientation. That was over 40 years ago.
However, we do not accept the ACT of homosexuality any more than we accept married contraceptive sex or masturbation. And we do not accept these acts because we love gay people, we love married couples who are contracepting, and we love people who masturbate, and we want them to live in freedom in Christ --- in happiness.
Take up Your Cross?
We don't base our opinion on a handful of Scripture, but on Christ's promises that He will be with the Church until the end of time, and the Church -- which loves us dearly -- says homosexuality is a disordered love, and homosexual acts are not good. The Church says the same thing about masturbation and married contraceptive relations. This is the Voice of Jesus Christ in the world today. But the Church also says that the temptation to masturbate, the temptation to do same sex acts and the temptation to use contraception in your marriage is not a sin, but -- in fact -- a path to holiness. All temptation is a path to holiness. The question only is, "Are you willing to take up your cross and follow Jesus?"Even if we weren't Christians, one only has to look at the human body to see that men and women are complementary. Men and men are not. I've been married for 30 years. My sexuality is drastically different than my husband's. Men are required to give of themselves in order to adapt to the female sexuality. And women vice versa. This self-giving love nurtures the family and permits a woman to become a wife and mother, a man to become a husband and father. Men with men get instant gratification because both partners desire sex in that same manner. Why is the Red Sea red, and the Dead Sea dead? There is water flowing in and out of the Red Sea, and it is alive, but water only goes one way with the Dead Sea, and it is dying.
Women need wooing, gentleness, and time. Men married to such women have to put aside their selfish desire for instant gratification and grow. Women married to men with the opposite but complementary sexuality have to grow also. From a Christian perspective, this is part of God's plan to make us holy in marriage. But from Nature's point of view, this is simply the way that men and women are made. It is the natural law. Also only women and men can produce children, become fruitful. This is obvious. So one doesn't need Scripture nor the Church to say homosexual acts are unnatural. Nature tells us so.
Same Sex Attraction and Opposite Sex Attraction are not Moral Sins
Unfortunately, the sexual revolution tried to recreate women as men -- you can have it all, M'am -- hook-ups, job, abortion -- all false freedom. This has basically destroyed the family and harmed men and women. We are not people of quick hook-ups. We are children of God, made in the image and likeness of God and we deserve to be loved as such. Heterorsexual men, who have chosen to hook-up with women, to be irresponsible with their sexuality, and not accept responsibility for the children they father, they are in no better position than the actively homosexual men. Now notice I am talking about ACTS, not attraction. Same sex attraction and opposite sex attraction are not moral sins. We do accept men and women with Same Sex Attraction or Opposite Sex Attraction! They are both human beings! Does that end our discussion?Begin with an Encounter With Christ
I said earlier that the the Church is the voice of Christ in the world today. I think we all need to be challenged to an encounter with the living Christ. The woman at the well in the Gospel of John was living with a man who was not her husband -- she was caught in the same disorder as an actively gay person or a heterosexual who is sleeping around. Jesus told her her sins. She was so happy she turned around and converted her whole village. And she was an historical person with a history after Scripture that is documented. That thought of yours -- "By the time the gospels were written, the stories about him had been told and retold many times and who knows how they may have changed before they were written?" -- why don't you confront Jesus Christ with that. Make Him show you the Truth. Only He can answer your questions, and Bill, you have them. Or we wouldn't be on this page.Read the early Church Fathers. St. Peter and St. Paul were put to death under the Roman emperor Nero before 64 AD. That means that the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts were written before 64 AD because Luke himself tells us that he wrote the Gospel first and he ends the Book of Acts before Paul is put to death. Now that is 30 years from the Ascension of Jesus! Furthermore, Luke is borrowing from the Greek translation of Matthew, who recorded all the sayings of Jesus. Matthew was a tax collector. A tax collector had to keep good records or else the Romans would have put him to death. Long before 50 AD, Matthew's Aramaic sayings of Jesus are published! And Biblical scholars agree that Mark's Gospel, which is the shortest, is the first official translation of Matthew into Greek. And Luke only had that Greek translation from Mark when he wrote his Gospel -- before 64 AD.
In addition, the number of sources to the whole New Testament is more extensive than any other writing of that era. These sources are written in Greek, Latin, Syriac, Coptic and some Aramaic, and yet they all agree. Each source also has its own history of veracity. Even if we had none of the New Testament, we could recreate it from the writings of the early Church Fathers -- beginning with the contemporaries of the Apostles, such as Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna, and Irenaeus of Lyon, Clement of Rome and Ignatius of Antioch.
Surely, finding out whether the Gospels are true or not, and whether our lifestyles conform with the Mind of God would be a good investment of everyone's prayer and study time.
Route 666 or Route 333?
Eternity is a long time. Where we are living now is a just a cheap one night stand on the great highway of life.There are two routes, one --- Route 666 -- is broad and wide, easily traveled and takes us to
The other route is very narrow, Route 333. It is more difficult, requires a lot of suffering, but it takes us to a shore where the Children of God come dancing home in joy and hug Our Father. He puts a ring on our fingers, kills the fatted calf and holds a big party.
Route 333 begins with a encounter with Jesus Christ.
God bless you, Bill. Susan Fox
"However, we do not accept the ACT of homosexuality any more than we accept married contraceptive sex or masturbation."
ReplyDeleteIt all comes down to what you believe. You believe these acts are against the will of God and sinful. I believe that, if they don't hurt or negatively impact anyone else, then they are a private and personal matter with which neither I nor anyone else should have a problem.
Hi Bill! How are you? I published this comment again at the top of the page of the next article, Welcome Bill IV: No Man Is An Island
ReplyDeleteSee:
http://christsfaithfulwitness.blogspot.com/2013/08/welcome-bill-iv-no-man-is-island.html