Featured Pope Sanctions Gay Clergy!

You and others on this board say that people with homosexual desires (orientation) are automatically guilty of committing homosexual acts. That is pure nonsense and what makes fundamentalists Baptists often look so foolish. I understand more and more why Baptists are shrinking in numbers.

Of course a person with homosexual desires can live a life of chastity and obedience to the Lord without ever committing a homosexual act. Most evangelical & Catholic Christians are smart enough to figure that out without too much trouble.

If you become a Christian and discover that you cannot “pray the gay away,” although some well meaning Christians may have suggested that you can do exactly that, what do you do then?
You can come to the conclusion that Christianity must be false since the kind of change you were expecting didn’t take place, and sticking around for some of the changes God might consider far more important doesn’t seem too worthwhile in light of your present disappointment. You can give up and you can go back.
You could also decide that, since your heterosexual arousal factor remains stuck on zero, well, God must have made you this way and the liberals are right after all. Who knew? You don’t have to abandon “Christianity,” you just need to find the right kind. The kind that suits you. Try to rein it in a bit and things will be fine.
Or you can recognize that your sexual orientation, past, present, and future, has precious little to do with it, no matter how it got that way, and no matter what you can or cannot do about it now. It will occur to you that the God who has called you to faith and repentance is also eager to provide you with the graces necessary for the daily struggle against the world, the flesh, and the devil, just like He does with everyone else who is so chosen.
.
As far as raparative therapy. Too much made of it but sometimes seems to have some effect. But such a transformation does not take place because God has a keen interest in helping them to swap out one form of lust for another. It is not on a par with going from the fire back into the frying pan. I believe it happens because He has issued to them a vocational calling to become the husbands and wives, and the mothers and fathers, they were meant to be all along. He will not settle for anything less. I think it is also because, in keeping with His Providence, that kind of healing remains a possibility in their lives.

God is very much in the business of making people whole and He’s quite good at it. He can handle cancer, diabetes, withered limbs, issues of blood, AIDS - you name it. But Joni Eareckson Tada is still a quadriplegic, and not because she did anything wrong. We might also notice that, while the lame can be made to walk, and the blind made to see, the spontaneous regeneration of missing limbs is . . . a bit rare. Who gets credit for that?
The thought of becoming a “eunuch for the Kingdom of Heaven’s sake” may not cause your face to light up right away when it dawns on you that the other alternatives simply aren’t open to you. (Then again, it might!) But if you are being called to a life of chastity and obedience by God Himself, you will come to learn that this is not simply “Plan B” for His red-headed stepchildren whose birthdays He can’t always remember. It is rather a glorious thing, and precisely what He has in mind for you.
The Church cannot offer the world a semi-Pelagian “gospel” of petit bourgeois respectability, one in which all you really have to do is believe most of the right things and behave yourself. And, above all else, be normal. She cannot say to the sexual profligate: “Go straighten yourself out, then get back to us.” That might take awhile.
She must open her arms, and her doors, to all the repentant sinners to whom God has issued an invitation to come inside. Since He appears to have no interest in doing so, she ought not try to apply a “one size fits all” method in helping those sinners go on to become new creatures in Christ. She will want to let Him take care of the details and not get in His way. Thats this Catholics opinion.

 

William Lane Craig -

Craig received a Bachelor of Arts degree in communications from Wheaton College, Illinois, in 1971 and two summa cum laude master's degrees from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School in Deerfield, Illinois, in 1975, in philosophy of religion and ecclesiastical history and in the History of Christian Thought.[1] He earned a Ph.D. in philosophy under John Hick at the University of Birmingham, England, in 1977 and a D.Theol. under Wolfhart Pannenberg at the University of Munich in 1984.[7]
From 1980 to 1986 he was an assistant professor of philosophy at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. He briefly held the position of associate professor of religious studies at Westmont College in Santa Barbara, California, from 1986 to 1987. From 1987 to 1994 Craig pursued further research at the University of Louvain, Belgium. Since 1996 he has held the position of research professor of philosophy at Talbot School of Theology, Biola University in La Mirada, California.[7]


Are you talking about the same person??

 

First of all the issue that cause this discussion in the first place is not about someone who was pure in all their ways - having a bad thought. It is about their going out and engaging in that sin.

So why are you going there?

in Christ,

Bob

 

Originally Posted by BobRyan
Interesting "Who am I to judge" - given the contents of supposedly infallible decrees of Lateran IV calling for the "extermination" of heretics.

But that aside - the article said this



It is unclear from that statement if the Pope is talking about a gay person that confesses that this is sin and repents of it and asks God to forgive them - or if he is speaking of someone living in sin.
Since priests are not even supposed to have relations with women - let alone other men - it is not clear that the Pope was spinning that one to anything other than "celibacy" as the only accepted standard for priests - since that is what they demand currently.

As for the "trusted aide" if that aide was celebate (supposedly) then the context may be that of an aide determined to remain celebate despite falling into sin.

I don't know enough about the case in question but clearly the press is trying to swing it as if this is an open door policy for homosexual priests.

Nothing unclear about your statement above. But the article I skimmed seemed to be claiming that the Pope was opening a door for gay activity. And as I said - that could be due to the bias of the news media.

As I stated in my post - that does not seem likely since priests are supposed to be celibate altogether.

The SDA church does not operate any abortion mills - that I know of.

Even the hospitals are run under a separate organization with some hospitals owned by that healthcare organization while others are merely managed. But that is another thread.

Just the facts please.

in Christ,

Bob

 

You're quite right, it is. But temptation is not a choice. Temptation hits you from the blind side and then forces you to make a choice. And Satan knows our hot buttons. For example, I have no interest in gambling. I don't think it's fun and I am never tempted to gamble. However, there are some who are constantly tempted to go to casinos and waste all their money because of the lure of the excitement (to them) of gambling.

However, I do have an appreciation for beautiful, or even fairly attractive, women. I am naturally attracted to them. This attraction is not a choice, it is a temptation. Consequently I have been forced to make many choices to resist the temptation and not to become too familiar with these women.

I have never been attracted to a man, so for me there is no temptation and therefore no choice to make. However, if I were attracted to men I would have to resist this temptation. Pursuing the relationship with a man would be a choice to sin but rejecting it would also be a choice not to sin.

So to wrap this up, DHK, it is a fact that some men are naturally (or perhaps I should say unnaturally) attracted to other men. That is their temptation and it is not a choice. Satan knows their inclinations and brings about the temptation. Then this man must choose succumb to temptation and engage in the homosexual behavior or to resist temptation and reject the homosexual act.

However, if he never succumbs to the temptation and lives a perfectly chaste life, he is still a homosexual. Just as much so as a man who is attracted to women but never marries and lives a chaste life is still a heterosexual.

I realize this seems rather elementary but having read several of your posts on this subject I believe elementary discussion is in order.

 

DHK has no idea what he is talking about. I'm sure Dr. Craig will be amused to hear that he has been labeled a Looney 'Catholic'. To my knowledge, Talbot Theological Seminary has no Catholics teaching in that seminary, and seems I remember him pastoring Rocky Mount Baptist Church at one time. Hmmmmm Just another Looney Catholic, eh DHK??

 

Rome is like a chameleon. Whatever you want it provides as it contains within its bosom the fornication of all false religions on the face of the earth and is an amalgumation of contradictions woven together by the spirit of deception.

So the Pope can offer something to everyone because Rome has embraced every false doctrine on the face of the earth and therefore can open its polluted arms to Moslems, Hindu's, homsexuals, charismatics, non-charismatics, sacradotalists and non-sacradolists, augsutinains and non-augustinians, etc., etc., etc. as it is the bottomless pit of inquity that all heaven and earth will rejoice when it is destroyed (Rev. 19:1-4).

 

I thought threads on human sexuality were forbidden in this section.

Anyway, my 2 cents are that the Catholic Church under the pope is the whore of Babylon - a false bride of Christ who has adulterated herself with a multitude of pagan rituals and false beliefs.

I DO think that people are born with proclivities - or at the very least learn them at a very young age. What is the difference between a denominational pastor who has lust in his heart for women who are not his wife, and a gay priest who has lust in his heart for other men? None. Lust is lust... be it homosexual or heterosexual. Those with gay lust are called to refrain from acting on that lust, just as those straight, married men who lust after other women are called to refrain from having extra-marital affairs. It doesn't mean that they eliminate the lust and temptation, it means they don't give in to it.

Jam 1:12 Blessed is a man who perseveres under trial; for once he has been approved, he will receive the crown of life which the Lord has promised to those who love Him.
14 But each one is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own lust.
15 Then when lust has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and when sin is accomplished, it brings forth death.​

This is why I don't use the term "homosexuality" if I can help it. I like to use the term "homosexual behavior." Truth be told, if we classified ourselves based on our lusts, rather than our actions, we would all be adulterers, fornicators, rapists, murderers, etc. It is no different for those with gay lusts. Their lusts are no more sinful than ours.

And keep in mind Adam and Eve lusted in the garden of Eden - so we can't even blame our sin nature.

 

Of course I don't agree with your conclusion on the Church being 'The Great Whore' but maybe you have read too much Dave Hunt :laugh:

However, I am in full agreement with the rest of your statement.

 

Can you show me where LENT appears in scripture?

http://www.whale.to/c/churches_ill.html

Once you have viewed the page above to see just how many evil and satanic symbols reside within the Catholic church, watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=221sYyagu2I&list=PLCED9C361662866BD&index=23

This series, called "know your enemy" traces Satan's seat of power throughout world history. This link takes you directly to the part dealing with the Catholic church.

 

Precisely! Sin is usally defined by the deviant act instead of the deviant attitude that gives birth to the act. In Matthew 15 when Jesus defines what defiles a man he begins with the inside "from the heart" and its immediate deviant attitude "evil THOUGHTS".

Therefore, if there is any truth to some sins more prominent in some people over others it is the prominence issueing forth from the deviant heart or fallen nature in response to genetic weaknesses or strengths.

If there is any kind of prominent tendency it is found in the depraved natures tendency rather than in any kind of genetic issue.

 

I don't really care whether someone is "born that way" or whether it is a proclivity that develops later... lust is still lust. Many people have particular areas of sin that they personally struggle against. For example, some may struggle with lying, or some others may struggle with chemical dependencies, or some may struggle with sexual sins. The fact of the matter remains - just as a heterosexual man is called to keep his sexual behavior in check and not engage in extra-marital affairs, or sex outside of marriage, a homosexual man is asked also to subject his sexual behavior to God and His standards.

I agree with you and Bob that lust is from the heart, and to lust in your heart is sin. But the scripture says to "take every thought captive and subject it to Christ." Just because a thought enters our mind isn't sin... but giving it place, pondering it, and entertaining it is sin. You have to remember we are unregenerate, corrupted flesh. If we set our minds on who we are in the flesh, we will sin. If we set our minds on who we are in the spirit, we will do the things of God. Remember, Paul said he does the things he doesn't want to do, and doesn't do the things he thinks he should, but that the very fact that his spirit agrees with the scripture that certain things were good demonstrated that he was still righteous on the inner-man, even if his flesh was weak and he allowed the sin in him to control his actions. To avoid the lusts of the flesh, he says to set our minds on the things of the spirit.

 

I have no problem with your explanation. We are in an internal battle and the strengths and weakness of Christians do differ from person to person.

However, the root is the fallen nature which is capable of any sin. Every man is capable of being a Hitler because the very same fallen nature in Hitler that expressed his sins indwells all men.

Christians not only have the responsibility to resist temptation but have the power in the indwelling Person of the Holy Spirit and so we are without excuse.

Homosextuality is a CHOICE that cannot be excused by temptations, weaknesses of the flesh or any other pass the buck mentality.

 

My wife say's "which dog are you feeding?" There are two dogs... one is the spirit, and one is the flesh. You can choose which dog to feed. The bigger dog will dominate the smaller dog. It's a good metaphor.

Is it a choice? Doesn't Jesus say "the one who sins is a slave to sin" in John 8? Do slaves really have a choice? Now for the believer, there is a choice, but for the unbeliever who doesn't have a righteous spirit of Christ within them, I don't see how they can possibly resist sin indefinitely (or why they should want to). I agree with you, however, upon the principle that the responsibility for the choice is not something that can be transferred to anyone else, and I think that's what you mean by "pass the buck mentality."

 

When it comes to being a Christian it is a choice as you have two power options (the flesh, the indwelling Spirit). When it comes to the unregenerated man he is Satan's child, his slave and Satan is a cruel master. To Satan's slave we share the gospel and pray that God will free him from his bondage of sin calling him out of darkness into light.