I think we all know from countless passages from the Bible that homosexual acts are a sin. Yet many Churches have gone as far as ordaining homosexuals who engage in homosexual acts, ordaining women, marrying homosexuals, etc. etc.
Is the Bible not clear enough for them? Or are they not Christian anymore?
Because a lot of protestants don't believe in sola scriptura, and most of these LGBT supporters aren't true christians.
This seems to be true though it makes zero sense to me. How do you justify being a protestant without sola scriptura?
sola parts of the scriptura i read
I wouldn't say the passages are countless. There's a few solid ones. It isn't mentioned in the ten commandments and is far from solidified in the gospels.
Homophobia as part of the bedrock of Christianity isn't justified.
because sola scriptura means that the interpretation is up to you.
I would say this is a moot point: there are many things not solidified in the Gospels because they did not need to be. Jesus and the Apostles mentioned sins which would have been problems of the day (e.g. divorce). The destruction of Sodom should be a strong enough warning for future readers of the Holy Scripture.
Where did this idea that something needs to be repeated hundreds of times or else God was just joking come from?
Because they are free to interpret these passages as they like - and since it's not a fundamental belief of Christianity, like belief in God or that Christ was resurrected, it's relatively easy to do so.
It may be true and required, but it's not fundamental. It definitely doesn't have the same rank as, say, belief that there is one God.
Not all prots are sola scriptura, in fact Anglicanism is basically Catholic doctrine wise. We've even canonized King Charles I
Yet they managed to be as cucked
lol ok
You can't.
They put the laws of the land over God's laws
Because Sola Scriptura changes depending on who is reading it and which Bible translation you are reading. If you read it and you think the holy spirit gives you understanding then how can anyone be wrong?
I love bringing up scripture that goes against liberal sensibilities.
The serpent said the same thing.
Is the prohibition of homosexuality as important a doctrine as the doctrine of Resurrection? Sure, they are both doctrines, but one is more fundamental than the other, even if both are true and must always be followed.
The authority of the word of God is fundamental. Most people question it, including most Cath/prot denominations by explicitly overriding it with commandments of men. This ultimately leads to strange doctrines and you see the result.
Catholics believe in both Scripture and Tradition, why do many priests tolerate LGBT?
Have you ever listened to Liberal churches' interpretations? They pretty much discard virtually everything that disagree with them.
because of J*suits
They are apostolics.
Jysuits? Never heard of 'em. Jusuits? Jasuits?
Jojosuits
lol it's literally a handful
Having this evening watched a couple of youtube videos which explains the way that prohomos approach those verses, their arguments put forward something along the lines of the following:
How they justify this from/work within/around scripture is that they argue that everytime homosex is mentioned it's within a specific historical/cultural/situational context which simply doesn't apply today
They will probs also sling in something about bigotry, progress and that 'love is love, man' but yeah, That's it in a nutshell.
While I'm sympathetic to (maybe the wrong word, I pity, rather) those homos who've swallowed this pill and think they're in the right with this, and that if you don't think about it particularly hard you could convince yourself that any of the above holds sway, it's looks like a whole bunch of mental gymnastics to justify sin to me. I get that homos typically a more degenerate in their sexuality than straight people (although won't be far behind soon with the way things are going), and again I am sympathetic to those who hold fast to the idea that not literally every gay is a degenerate deviant hedonist and that one would in this day and age actually be capable of having a committed, loving, monogamous relationship due to what homosexuality has been provided with the opportunity to develop into in our society, but really, for my money it's simply obvious that it's wrong, is not how we were designed and is inherently disordered, is against the purpose and principle of marriage and that it should be treated as a mental disorder and not enabled.
With regard to women priests etc., by contrast I haven't just watched a vid on pro-egalitarian position so not aware of the various arguements they use off the top of my head, but am aware more generally they similarly put emphasis on the relevant passages referring to specific historical/cultural/situational contexts in which those parts of scripture were written in and were supposed to apply to and how, given the context has changed, we no longer need to heed to or apply what is written there. Also aware however generally unlike the homo debate their are varying degrees to the approach on this topic (full on old school patriarchy (and if subscribed to whether that should apply in church only, in church and family or church, family and the professional and political spheres etc), complementarianism, full blown egalitarianism borne of feminism, etc. etc.)
streamlining to make Christianity marketable. It's the reason I begame.
that should be is referring to, my mistake
/thread
This is something I've prayed about a lot. I mean, I don't think I'd want to go to a church that stressed gay-bashing(Westboro Baptist et al) but I don't think it should be celebrated either.
I felt God calling me towards a local Episcopal Church a couple Christmases ago. This particular church kept jumping into my mind. I watched a childhood favorite, Home Alone, and was moved by the church scene. I Googled it and sure enough it was an Episcopal church.
I loved the aesthetic of the church and greatly enjoyed the midnight mass. The people there were nice. But when I joined the adult religious ed there was a trans person, I learned the reverend was gay, he stated at one point he thought the church would be extinct in less than a century(nice sales pitch!), and there were literally Communists there rationalizing that Marxist didn't -really- mean what he said about religion. Someone told me about a priest who asked a bishop if he could also become a Buddhist monk. I just stopped going.
I really wish I could see what the church was like before 2000 or so.
very good analysis. i don't usually post often here but i appreciate your balanced approach to this matter. i think that you've done well to capture the attitude of pro-homosex christians, and i buy it. obviously i'm still against it though xD
an i appreciate your kind comment, m8
wut
Because every protestant is his own magisterium and believes only their interpretation of scripture is correct
Satan infiltrating churches. Happens to all denoms. Nothing new and it's only gonna get worse.
eh, no
...
I would doubt your salvation if you believe homosexual acts are not a sin that needs to be repented of. Of course it's not my place to make the final judgement on that, but it's something that is so blatantly clear in scripture that you have to willfully defy God's word to come to the liberal/reddit conclusions on the matter. So it is far from being some unimportant doctrine, it's a matter of spiritual life and death.
lel go cry to your tranny priest
...
A more productive discussion whatever denom you are is how do we stop it. Catholics can't pretend this isn't happening to your churches as well and Orthos you know in time they're going to try and come for you. It's Satanic. We all know this is wrong. We all believe in Jesus Christ. How do we stop it?
The solution is matthew 5:29-30
The context of "body" and "members" being 1 corinthians 12:12-26
What did god mean by this
because dude didn't you read that part of the gospel where jesus healed the centurion's gay boytoy or whatever? that means homosex is totally okay bruh! sure it's contrary to natural law and it spreads disease and it's just obviously disgusting and wrong to the point where one might wonder why we even have to discuss it but no worries the holy spirit is totally guiding my interpretation of scripture lmao sola scriptura ftw xD
Read Genesis. Come back if you can't figure it out at that point.
...
If Catholics believe homosexuality is a sin why do those of their “leadership” get ROUTINELY outed as homosexual child predators?
...
I am as digusted with the homos as much as any conservative. I am absolutely sure it is wrong. Anyone who spends a significant time reading the bible and praying for the Holy Spirit to guide them, I'm sure, will reach the same conclusion
However, I'm not sure that a very small subset of genuinely confused homo-Christians might not be saved. I don't think it's such a fundamental doctrine that their salvation isn't possible. I see your point but I don't think it's quite as certain as that.
Reading and believing.
If there is a genetic component to homosexuality then it is only as strong as a susceptibility to environmental factors that turn them gay.
If they read the bible they wouldn't be protestants in the first place.
Or maybe there's nothing of interest for satan to infiltrate? :^)
How's putin's cock user? Or Erdoğan and his Muslim friends ones in Istambul?
It's SOLA how I interpret SCRIPTURA!
At least when I get into controversial Bible passages I make sure I'm not the only one coming to that conclusion and read other people's research and make sure it's well founded.
And these morons wonder why their Churches are dying. It's so easy to see they don't believe and think Church is just their vector for pushing their personal views on social justice. Disgusting.