CIVIL RELIGIOUS DISCUSSION: General Religious Discussion...

[ATM]

...In context, you couldn't get much more sinful than a tax collector...

Still true.

 

[Ziggidy]

I guess I do not get all the difficulty with this topic. "Would you go to a gay wedding?"

I believe when 2 same sex people are getting married, they have passed beyond the idea that many people will frown upon them. Me going or not will not matter.

When 2 same sex decide to get married, they are actually living out their sin and really do not fall into the category of being a christian (although some ultra liberal churches embrace this) I do believe one can be gay and not live out the lustful sin. I do not believe people are born gay (no scientific proof of that).

It's a decision based on personal conviction, nothing more. I think I would refrain from going, not because the church says one thing or another, but rather because I do not want to see sin in action. Matthew 7:6 comes to mind.

I sin daily but I do not believe I live in sin. Like Paul, I often do the things I do not want to do and fail to do the things I want to do.

 

[breakingcontact]

This is inexact.

Jesus called on ALL people to repent.

In fact, because I have Zacchaeus handy, I am reminded that Jesus expressed support for Zacchaeus BEFORE he repented.

Check out Matthew 9:9-13. Jesus spent (it appears) at least a long evening with sinners. The call to repent would've taken what... 15 minutes? Half an hour? An hour, tops? While it is unstated, I suspect Jesus was connecting with these people. Not because they were righteous, but because they were sinful.

Of course he called on all to repent, that isn't inexact it is understood.

As far as the first words out of your mouth being REPENT AND BELIEVE that would be one extreme whereas the most common thing I see if folks "building relationships" and never getting around the the gospel which offends.

Sent from my SM-T280 using Tapatalk

 

[JettaKnight]

...you couldn't get much more sinful than a tax collector.

Still true.

Always good to know that ATM has an eye on us.

 

[T.Lex]

Of course he called on all to repent, that isn't inexact it is understood.

It is inexact to say that Jesus only "rebuked" sinners. Rather, He was known at the time for not rebuking sinners enough.

As far as the first words out of your mouth being REPENT AND BELIEVE that would be one extreme whereas the most common thing I see if folks "building relationships" and never getting around the the gospel which offends.

If you are not there, then it makes sense that you would not see it.

 

[T.Lex]

Always good to know that ATM has an eye on us.

Noted the same thing.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Like everyone today, we hard time just sitting still and listening to someone.

With the understanding this is going to come out sounding like I've gone full hippy-around-the-campfire: We have trouble listening to ourselves, let alone others. I'm still learning to sit and ask myself what I *really* want vs what I think I'm expected to want, if what I think I want is what I really want, and if I get what I want...will I still have wanted it?

Sometimes nothing sucks quite as much as getting what you asked for.

 

[JettaKnight]

With the understanding this is going to come out sounding like I've gone full hippy-around-the-campfire: We have trouble listening to ourselves, let alone others. I'm still learning to sit and ask myself what I *really* want vs what I think I'm expected to want, if what I think I want is what I really want, and if I get what I want...will I still have wanted it?

Sometimes nothing sucks quite as much as getting what you asked for.

IKR?



Couple that with the need to comment on every post as quickly as possible.



Oh, wait...

 

[breakingcontact]

It is inexact to say that Jesus only "rebuked" sinners. Rather, He was known at the time for not rebuking sinners enough.


If you are not there, then it makes sense that you would not see it.

Man... you want to talk inexact?

He was know at the time for not rebuking sinners enough, by whose standards?



Sent from my SM-T280 using Tapatalk

 

[T.Lex]

Man... you want to talk inexact?

He was know at the time for not rebuking sinners enough, by whose standards?

Yours and mine. Or at least, the contemporaneous community of believers. Which might as well have been you and me.

Again, skimming over your posts on the last couple pages, I'm not seeing any Bible references for the notion that Jesus would expect no Christian to attend something like a gay wedding.

I understand that attending something like that would be uncomfortable. But we should avoid clothing that discomfort in Christ's teachings if it isn't in His teachings.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

In fact, because I have Zacchaeus handy, I am reminded that Jesus expressed support for Zacchaeus BEFORE he repented.

Check out Matthew 9:9-13. Jesus spent (it appears) at least a long evening with sinners. The call to repent would've taken what... 15 minutes? Half an hour? An hour, tops? While it is unstated, I suspect Jesus was connecting with these people. Not because they were righteous, but because they were sinful.

With this in mind...if were invited you to a commitment ceremony, would you go with the intent to connect with the people with the intention of witnessing to them and being the physician?

 

[T.Lex]

With this in mind...if were invited you to a commitment ceremony, would you go with the intent to connect with the people with the intention of witnessing to them and being the physician?

Well, if I'm invited, I probably have some sort of connection (or my wife does).

In terms of witnessing, that's why I mentioned "calling" upthread. I very much believe this is connected to the evangelizing/proselytizing we are all expected to do. We all are called in different ways, with different styles.

I love God. I try (and fail) to live up to His expectations for me.

In the celebration of a gay ceremony, I would look for opportunities to share my faith experience with them. First, just me being there would probably be a conversation-starter. "I didn't think you'd actually be here!" Second, it isn't up to me whether someone turns away from whatever sin they have. I can share that my life is better off by living as I believe God intended me to live it.

It is not for me to judge whether someone else is living in the manner God intended for them.

To put it another way, hypothetically, if a gayness was a person's only sin (as if *I* only had one sin) then it is up to God to determine the severity of that sin. I cannot cast that stone.

I'm not sure I would be a very good physician. What's the old saying, "Doctor, heal thyself." I can only hope to be an example and look for opportunities to share my faith.

To slightly shift the approach, I have a difficult time in work environments. "I'll be praying for you." used to roll off my tongue too easily. Fortunately, most of the people I work with on a day-to-day basis know where I am on that and accept me for who I am. (There's one other practicing Catholic, so he and I are more open about those things.) For the most part, rightly or wrongly, though, the faith part of "me" can get covered up in the work context.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

It is not for me to judge whether someone else is living in the manner God intended for them.

Does Catholicism teach that God intends for people to live in the ways that they do? That God intends a homosexual couple to live that lifestyle? I don't get that. I believe his will can be done no matter what choice we make but I don't believe he intends for us to live in rebellion to him.

I believe we're not to judge hypocritically but God gave us the ability to judge. It seems to me we're supposed to judge the actions of others. If we didn't and make the necessary adjustments to our interactions to them, we'd find ourselves in trouble all the time. In fact, if memory serves, that's the entire point of Proverbs.

 

[Ziggidy]

It is not for me to judge whether someone else is living in the manner God intended for them.

To put it another way, hypothetically, if a gayness was a person's only sin (as if *I* only had one sin) then it is up to God to determine the severity of that sin. I cannot cast that stone.

There is "righteous judgement" that we are instructed to follow.
John 7:24 and Matt. 7:15 - 16 certainly supports righteous judgement. We are always allowed to judge, but we sin when we judge according to a different standard, that is not from God (Jesus). Those verses are very clear on that.

I believe the difficulty is when we begin to judge the person rather than the sin. When we are born again, God gives us the Holy Spirit. We learn what is right and wrong, not according to the world, but according to God. In fact, we begin judging ourselves to make sure we are living according to His will. Once we begin to judge the person (rather than the sin), we ourselves are sinning. Only God can judge the person.

You also mention the sin of the gay person, and the severity of their sin. This is not supported biblically; as stated in the above verses. The mistake people often make is believing when a christian speaks out against sin, they think they are judging the person; it is very wrong and not correct.

Now, 1Cor. 5:11-13 tells us not to keep company of those brothers (sisters) who lead a sinful life. It was brought up in the threads that some gays call themselves christian. Although I do not believe one who is "living" in sin is truly a christian, we are instructed not to keep company with them. This is where the (my) difficulty comes into play. I ask myself, what if they claim not to be christian? Do I attend? I believe that is a personal decision each one of must make on our own.

Finally, IMO, it appears as though your associate your "sin" as the same as the sin of a gay person. I believe we need to be careful what we believe to be biblical and not. We all sin daily, no-one is without sin. The difference is when we have a life of sin (living in sin) versus sinning. I sin daily but I am not living in sin. The way I live is not a mistake but I do make mistakes. I chose to live like Christ (I try - but fail) versus I chose to live like Christ but want to ignore His teaching (warning) about homosexual lifestyle. You cannot do both. I do believe one can claim to be gay but live a life for Christ. Temptations are not a lifestyle, not a sin. Living out those temptations in spite of Jesus is in fact, living a life of sin.

I may not be as articulate as others here, I hope you get my point.

 

[T.Lex]

Does Catholicism teach that God intends for people to live in the ways that they do? That God intends a homosexual couple to live that lifestyle? I don't get that. I believe his will can be done no matter what choice we make but I don't believe he intends for us to live in rebellion to him.

I believe we're not to judge hypocritically but God gave us the ability to judge. It seems to me we're supposed to judge the actions of others. If we didn't and make the necessary adjustments to our interactions to them, we'd find ourselves in trouble all the time. In fact, if memory serves, that's the entire point of Proverbs.

Oof. Several things to unpack. I didn't want to take any of your points out of context, so I did the full-quote, but I need to break the points down to really address them.

Oh, and at this point in the conversation, I'm sharing my view in a casual/conversational way. That's not really for you, but for anyone looking to catch a local Romanist in a "gotcha" moment.

"Does Catholicism teach that God intends for people to live in the ways that they do?"
So, God does have a plan for all of us. Whether we think of that as a lifelong "path" or a series of choices in which we are tested, I don't think matters. The important idea is that God created each of us. He is part of each of us. The better we connect with that part of God in us, we are better able to discern His plan for us.

But, I don't think ANY of us live our entire lives in the way He intended us to. We all sin. We all make mistakes. But, God also has plans for what happens when we let Him down.

I confess that I am not privy to what happens in the Final Judgment. I do believe, though, that we will be called to account for our sins. All of them. The open ones and the private ones.

"That God intends a homosexual couple to live that lifestyle?"

So, again, I'm not privy to His will. I believe that God knew Judas would betray Jesus. Did God intend it? Again, I don't know. On the one hand, it is hard for me to believe that God intended Judas to sin, to sin terribly. But at the same time, God certainly could have. For me, it makes more "sense" (not that God needs to be understood by me) that God knew Judas was prone to betrayal, would have a seriously weak moment, and it would take an incredible dedication to Jesus for him to resist that temptation. But, Judas's failure was part of the plan.

I believe God uses many mechanisms to teach us. Much like Jesus used many parables. Especially in today's world, we see examples of sinfulness all around us. Some test us. Some help form our resolve. Some hold a mirror to our own sins.

I do not know if any particular gay couple, or all of them, are living in accord with God's will. For that to be true does stretch my understanding of God's intent for the world.

"I believe his will can be done no matter what choice we make but I don't believe he intends for us to live in rebellion to him."
Absolutely. God intends for us to live in unity WITH Him. Not in rebellion to him. If only it were easy.

But the question then becomes, if none of us (or at least very few) are in perfect unity with Him, are we to treat others not-in-unity?

I hope this helps explain my rationale. I see someone else has posted with slightly different queries while I was posting this. Of course, I apologize if I misunderstood your questions or errantly articulated Catholic docma on the topic.

 

[breakingcontact]

Yours and mine. Or at least, the contemporaneous community of believers. Which might as well have been you and me.

Again, skimming over your posts on the last couple pages, I'm not seeing any Bible references for the notion that Jesus would expect no Christian to attend something like a gay wedding.

I understand that attending something like that would be uncomfortable. But we should avoid clothing that discomfort in Christ's teachings if it isn't in His teachings.

Read Matthew.

A celebration which makes a mockery of the marriage context which Jesus describes as what God gave us, is no place for us.

Sent from my SM-T280 using Tapatalk

 

[breakingcontact]

We are absolutely called to judge (discern).

What we cannot do is condemn (damn).

Sent from my SM-T280 using Tapatalk

 

[T.Lex]

There is "righteous judgement" that we are instructed to follow.
John 7:24 and Matt. 7:15 - 16 certainly supports righteous judgement. We are always allowed to judge, but we sin when we judge according to a different standard, that is not from God (Jesus). Those verses are very clear on that.

Well, I think the earlier part of Matthew 7 is equally as instructive.

But, the John 7 is certainly interesting, right? Don't judge by outward appearances? How does that apply to a gay ceremony? (I'm reluctant to call it a 'marriage'.) By all appearances, it is wrong. To me, that passage is speaking to what is important. Circumcision - given by Moses - is more important than the specifics of what constitutes "work" on the Sabbath.

Coincidentally (?), Matthew 7 includes the Golden Rule. And the warning about self-deception. Which, admittedly, could cut both ways on this. So - what does that mean?

I believe the difficulty is when we begin to judge the person rather than the sin. When we are born again, God gives us the Holy Spirit. We learn what is right and wrong, not according to the world, but according to God. In fact, we begin judging ourselves to make sure we are living according to His will. Once we begin to judge the person (rather than the sin), we ourselves are sinning. Only God can judge the person.

You also mention the sin of the gay person, and the severity of their sin. This is not supported biblically; as stated in the above verses.

Can you elaborate on that last sentence? I'm sorry, I was right with you until that last bit. Scripture does support (at least in the Catholic tradition) that there are different severities of sin.

Now, 1Cor. 5:11-13 tells us not to keep company of those brothers (sisters) who lead a sinful life. It was brought up in the threads that some gays call themselves christian. Although I do not believe one who is "living" in sin is truly a christian, we are instructed not to keep company with them. This is where the (my) difficulty comes into play. I ask myself, what if they claim not to be christian? Do I attend? I believe that is a personal decision each one of must make on our own.

Yes, Paul's letter to the church of Corinth addresses these matters, to a certain extent. It was addressed to the members of the faith on how to treat those "within" the church. (Which, at that time, I'm not sure had actually separated from Judaism yet.)

I think, as important as the parts you mention, is when he exhorts people to live the life God intended for them. At the end, Paul even expresses that he has a personal view, while God might have a different view of how someone should act.

Personally, I believe Jesus's teachings are the top of the hierarchy. Paul, and the writings of the other Apostles, inform His teachings, but do no supplant them. There are some... administrative (for lack of a better word)... topics in the New Testament that are absolutely important. But not more important than Jesus's words.

Finally, IMO, it appears as though your associate your "sin" as the same as the sin of a gay person. I believe we need to be careful what we believe to be biblical and not. We all sin daily, no-one is without sin. The difference is when we have a life of sin (living in sin) versus sinning. I sin daily but I am not living in sin. The way I live is not a mistake but I do make mistakes. I chose to live like Christ (I try - but fail) versus I chose to live like Christ but want to ignore His teaching (warning) about homosexual lifestyle. You cannot do both. I do believe one can claim to be gay but live a life for Christ. Temptations are not a lifestyle, not a sin. Living out those temptations in spite of Jesus is in fact, living a life of sin.

I may not be as articulate as others here, I hope you get my point.

I think you did a fine job. But, I am bit unclear on that last paragraph. Is there a biblical reference for "living in sin" v. sinning. I'm thinking of the Samaritan woman at the well. Or healing of the centurion's servant.

 

[Ziggidy]

I do believe, though, that we will be called to account for our sins. All of them. The open ones and the private ones.

I do not want to steer away from the current topic, but where does it say that in the bible?

 

[JettaKnight]

Personally, I believe Jesus's teachings are the top of the hierarchy. Paul, and the writings of the other Apostles, inform His teachings, but do no supplant them. There are some... administrative (for lack of a better word)... topics in the New Testament that are absolutely important. But not more important than Jesus's words.

Where does the Pope fit into that hierarchy?