POPE Francis has made another headline, this time when the pontiff said, “Who am I to judge a gay person?”
While taking questions from reporters on the plane back to Rome, Francis spoke about gays and the reported “gay lobby.” According to the Wall Street Journal, the Pope’s comments about homosexuality came in the context of a question about gay priests.
The pontiff broached the delicate question of how he would respond to learning that a cleric in his ranks was gay, though not sexually active. For decades, the Vatican has regarded homosexuality as a “disorder,” and Pope Francis’ predecessor Pope Benedict XVI formally barred men with what the Vatican deemed “deep-seated” homosexuality from entering the priesthood.
“Who am I to judge a gay person of goodwill who seeks the Lord?” the pontiff said, speaking in Italian. “You can’t marginalize these people.”
Father James Martin, S.J. who is an admirer of Francis, said that the pontiff’s comment about gay people is consistent with the rest of his papacy.
“One of Francis’s hallmarks is an emphasis on mercy, which you see in that response. That mercy, of course, comes from Jesus. And we can never have too much of it.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/29/pope-francis-gays_n_3669635.html
Bryan Patterson's Faithworks 
HI Donna:
This is a belated thank you for the lovely girls’ night we had at your place last week. A great evening with wonderful women in your attractive home with delicious food.
I’m forwarding a piece from Bryan Patterson’s blog just in case you missed this bit of news from the Pope. It seems so good to me.
Shalom, Bonnie P.S. I brought along my Santorini piece “just in case” and I think it got left on the arm chair near your front door. Don’t keep it to give back to me–just recycle please. Thanks.
>________________________________ > From: Bryan Patterson’s Faithworks >To: bonthom@rogers.com >Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 9:35:30 PM >Subject: [New post] Pope Francis On Gays: Who Am I To Judge Them? > > > > WordPress.com >bryanpattersonfaithworks posted: ” POPE Francis has made another headline, this time when the pontiff said, “Who am I to judge a gay person?” While taking questions from reporters on the plane back to Rome, Francis spoke about gays and the reported “gay lobby.” According to the Wall” >
LikeLike
“Who am I to judge them?” I recently had to deal with a case of pedophilia where it was known that the priest in question had a taste for young boys. The same sort of excuse was used then as the pope uses now to defend the priest.
But that is not how Jesus Christ saw it. In Mat. 8:14-18 tells us that if someone is doing something wrong:
– First you talk to that person about it, with the scope of counselling that person to repent.
– Secondly you take witnesses with you and counsel that person again (if he didn’t listen to you the first time)
– Thirdly, you make the problem public and let the whole church decide.
– Fourthly, if the offender does not listen to the whole church, he or she is then excommunicated and held with the same contempt as the Jews of old held tax collectors and heathen.
But the pope generally ignores Jesus’ advice and uses the words who am I to judge?
LikeLike
There are closed sins that only God is aware of – we cannot judge people for sins we suspect they might do without proof.
And there are sins that are openly paraded and indulged in. In this case the Church has a duty to judge and excommunicate and possibly prosecute under the law. That is why this pope is right in one respect and wrong in many others.
LikeLike
You make the common mistake of confusing what someone IS with what someone DOES, davinci.
There’s a fundamental difference.
The more I hear about this pope the more I like his style.
LikeLike
Why is this important?
“cleric in his ranks was gay, though not sexually active”
Shouldn’t the Pope believe that God has the power to help ‘any’ sinner?
You could have a hetersexual Priest who has a lustful eye. There have been quite a few that have had sexual relations, breaking the vow of celibacy. That is sex outside of marriage. A relationship that hasn’t been blessed by God.
Though a gay Priest is committing two sins, not just one.
I suppose it is the same difficulty that some have with confessions. Some would rather just remove the risk altogether and does not trust that God will spiritually cure the sinner.
It’s not easy.
LikeLike
I concur with you Dreamweaver. I would have to add the following.-
Clearly, homosexual activity was ‘sinful’ for some obvious reasons in those Biblical days. But those folk did not understand all that we know today. As far as I’m concerned, a full homosexual relationship can be engaged in ethically or it can be engaged in wrongly- with love and fidelity, or with ‘using’ and with deceit or abuse. And this is as it applies to all relationships.
Just a question here…. If a homosexual or lesbian couple live together in love, relinquishing any thought of ‘being cured’, and engage in all the activities and affections that intimate relations consist of, but in the process never engaging in physical ‘union’ or sexual contact, is that to be regarded as ‘sinful’?
I do wonder about David and Johnathon in the Jewish Scriptures. On the surface, and reading what is said about them there, they were being unfaithful to their wives, whether they were homo-erotic or not. It is spelt out clearly that David in particular loved Johnathon MORE than he loved his wives. That is made very plain!
Rian.
LikeLike
“But those folk did not understand all that we know today.”
Hi Rian,
Question, “What do we know more today about homosexuality than the people of the Bible knew in their day? BTW, did you know that the incidence of AIDS is still exploding in the Gay community because of their sexual practices? Clearly, the anus was never designed by God to be used in that manner and God knew full well the repercussions of homosexual sex when He laid down His Law.
LikeLike
Rian,
Homosexuality was more prevalent in the Roman and Greek culture of Jesus’ time, although not in Jewish culture. Even today, it is less prevalent in Judaism, but more prevalent among Jews who have rejected Judaism.
All the apostles spoke against homosexuality and condemned it, notwithstanding the fact that it was ubiqutous in the roman empire of their day, more so than it is among today’s wester culture. We know of at least 4 emperors who were either paedophiles, or engaged in homosexuality. So you can’t use the argument that we don’t know better than they did.
The Jewish historian Josephus wirtes among other things that the spartans (where homosexuality was common) were on the way of rejecting this practice, even before the apostles came on the scene. And then you have the court case agaist the greek politican Timon, who was put to death because because homosexuality by then was rejected by the greeks if one wanted public office. It was like condemning Penny Wong from achieving political office because she is what whe is. One would have to ask why the greeks were starting to reject this orientation long before Jesus came on the scene.
So dont use the argument that we know better today-we actually dont. Your argument is based in deception.
LikeLike
Kathleen,
I think the whole issue revolves around the knowledge of whether someone is actually engaging in this sort of activity or not, and what should the church do if it is known that the person engages in this sort of activitities. I know many people that have come out of that background.
Unless I have proof that they are engaging in that sort of behaviour, I cannot judge them, because I cannot read the heart. I have to give them the benefit of the doubt.
The issue arises when the said person either provides proof that they engage in such activity and /or defends such activities. In that case I have to preach what the Bible tells us. The label of homphobia is foisted on me not by those wto whom I have given the benefit of the doubt but those who want Christians to condone and encourage the behaviour.
LikeLike
Yes, and that is what I believe the Pope means by this as well.
LikeLike
To davinci and Monica et al,
Thanks for the comments you guys offered in answer to my provocative post here.
Homosexual acts were not commonly seen among the ancient Jews, that’s for sure. They must have been around otherwise they would not have been condemned so vehemently in the Scriptural books. Mind you the absence of evidence for such practices is undoubtedly because the laws made it too dangerous to be seen doing them. I seem to recall that there are some countries round the world today where it is proudly proclaimed ‘We dont have any homosexuals in our land!’ Oh yeah?
What do we know today that they didnt know then? Loads we know now of course on all sorts of matters. Look at the ignorance about the processes of conception and embryonic life in those days. The whole business of being fertile and adding to the persons in the tribe by reproduction was crucial then. We just dont have that compulsion today. Nowadays, we are not particularly judgmental about folks who fail to ‘bring forth seed’ in our lands. ‘Deliberately barren’ folks dont worry us very much now.. There might well be no absolute evidence so far to prove some genetic divergence in Gay folk, but we do know better than before just how totally natural the homosexual urge feels to these people. Do you folk actually want a Theocracy in our land that will outlaw and criminalise homosexuality all over again?
People live much longer today, and with the far greater privacy that we have in our daily living, we are not subjected to the same scrutiny as they had then in the tiny communities. Think how that barbaric displaying of the stained bed-sheets from the bridal night is not practiced in our culture. We now know that the Christian God apparently doesnt anymore demand the circumcision of our baby boys.
Today, one obviously is not compelled to be part of the prevailing religion, so the laws and mores that are essentially religious dont apply to a big proportion of the population now. We now know that just because one is ‘Gay’ does not make him evil or anti-social as was thought in my early days. It may be claimed by some Churches that people can be ‘cured’ of their homosexuality, but such a process is difficult, time consuming and all too frequently ineffective and damaging..
I just have to put myself in the shoes of suffering Gay people and think to myself… ‘Just imagine if I were compelled by society or by a church to be cured of my heterosexuality’. Perish the thought. I dont ‘blame’ it onto a god for creating people that way. I think that it develops quite naturally in a small proportion of the population as one of the possible human variations and really shouldn’t be anyone-else’s business, so long a no criminal or damaging things happen because of it.
Funny how that ‘sin’ of Gay behaviour is regarded by many Christians as being far worse than most of the other sins that one might indulge in.
Of course I know that the Jewish and Christian Scriptures have those few passages that condemn the practices. Yes too, I know that certain of the Roman Emperors indulged in homosexual activities AND some decidedly evil things. Come to think of it, so did a number of the Catholic Popes, and as we know now, lots of clergymen of various denominations.
I am well aware of the fact that there are alarming statistics of AIDS through the Gay community these days. But I dont think anyone has implied that it is a majority group of them, that are so afflicted. But I have read that among the ‘straight’ ones of the land as well, there are increasingly large numbers of folk with STDs. Just a thought. Gays simply should not be singled out.
Some few weeks back on a TV programme it was pointed out that some hundred years back, approximately 10% of the population of (Christian) England had some degree of Syphilis. Careless practices and promiscuous or illegal sex practices are just as bad whether practiced by Homosexuals or by Heterosexuals. Oh, and anal sex is by no means the only way that gay persons practice. In any case for lesbians it would surely be rare anyway. (So please tell. Is Lesbian activity not QUITE so evil as male Gay practice???) .
I for one just cannot imagine why in the privacy of their own homes that respectable adult people of all persuasions should not indulge in mutually agreed upon sex practices that harm no-one. (they are going to anyway. By far the greatest problem for Gay folk is when they are shunned or criminalised in totally unnecessary and cruel ways, driven ‘underground’, or hounded to their own suicides with guilt imposed by religion.
Finally is anyone going to tackle my query about David and Johnathon? And what about my hypothetical about a deeply loving homosexual couple (male or female) who engage in any and all intimacies and familiarities of affection etc, BUT NO GENITAL SEX? Are deep loving kisses hugs,and caresses permitted in such a case? Are they genuinely permitted to love each other exclusively? Please do tell, someone – anyone?.
Rian.
LikeLike
Rian,
You have heard that it was said, `Do not commit adultery.’ 28But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart” – Jesus
The act of adultery, whether they love eachother or not, is forbidden.
That man could love that woman, as in the love of a friendship or a fellow human being, but if he felt that he could not stop himself from looking upon her in a more personal manner, then he would have to make sure he was separated from her – like chopping off your hand (in a metaphorical sense) to stop it from stealing.
LikeLike
Not a good example (or two!), Kate….( 1,,,,,”That is sex outside of marriage. 2,,,,,,,A relationship that hasn’t been blessed by God. “)
1,,,,,Paedophilia can no more be ‘sexual’ than can an intimate relationship with a pineapple.
2,,,,,,,,God nowhere requires marriage, but in fact blesses sex ‘without benefit of clergy’ ~ Gen.1:28 (ditto Gen.1.22)
……. positively confirmed by Gen.1:27. ie, Since we’re created in god’s image/likeness, and god produced all HIS children outside of wedlock, then the example we’ve been given speaks conclusively.
Marriage is a human construct, and serves a political purpose.
Ask Moses.
LikeLike
davinci, Monica and all,
To add to what I said in my main posting about the subject of homosexuality, here are a couple more points on the matter. I would maintain that there are many things that we know or understand better about than our forebears on such an issue. I’ve already given some examples in my original posts.
Something that the ancient world apparently did not comprehend was that a person can BE a homosexual as part of their human make up. Up until just recently it was believed that only supernaturally or demon inspired homosexual actions or behaviour existed, and that any giving in to the urge was purely evil and selfish as in any other wrongly considered action. It is a pity in my opinion if we can attribute the phenomena of ‘Voices in the head’ for example, to disturbances of the natural workings of the body and mind, – and yet attraction to others of our own sex is considered to be base or sinful.
Secondly, they apparently did not know, and for that matter WE didn’t know until it was acknowledged just a short time ago, that there are a number of other creatures in the animal world that have as part of their natural behaviour certain relating activities that among humans would be termed homosexual.
Thirdly, we know now that there are many mental illnesses that used to be attributed to the work or influence of demons. Then Epilepsy and presumably what we call Autism would similarly be classed as evil, rather than as natural outcomes of irregular ‘wiring’ in the brain as we understand it. Now we understand that irregular influences of natural substances like Hormones and other chemicals can disturb the normal running of the body and mind.
My last comment is just slightly irrelevant perhaps to the debate in question, but here it is. The word Homosexuality should not be pronounced with the first letter o spoken as in the word Home. Rather, it carries correctly the sound of o as in the word On. I guess everyone is familiar with the fact that Homosexual does not refer to hom as in Human or Mankind. It relates purely to the root that describes the concept of Same as, or Of like nature. Apologies if everyone already knows that.
Cheers, Rian.
LikeLike
I didn’t know that Rian,
About the word ‘homosexual’. Thank you for educating me.
As a Christian who has been very much involved in the ‘Deliverance Ministry’ i.e., exorcisms, I can confidently state that when you are dealing with sin, and especially sins of an illicit sexual nature, there are always ‘unclean spirits’ involved, after all they are attracted to sin. Mind you, expelling these spirits will not stop a person from sinning—we do that very well all on our own, thank you very much! But where sin abounds, so does the demonic. I can assure you that sexual lust, homosexual or otherwise, needs to be repented of (stop it!), so that God can then cleanse us from all the hangers-on (unclean spirits).
And as far as King David and Jonathon goes, I personally find your inference offensive because that’s the argument that Gays use against us. “Rather than being evidence for a homosexual relationship in the Bible, the account of David and Jonathan is an example of true biblical friendship. True friendship, according to the Bible, involves loyalty, sacrifice, compromise, and yes, emotional attachment. That is what we should learn from David and Jonathan. The idea that the only person in the Bible described as “a man after God’s own heart” (Acts 13:22), was a practicing homosexual (or bisexual) is ridiculous and has no true biblical basis.
Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/David-and-Jonathan.html#ixzz2aaT8MBJS
As far as I am concerned, there is no way that their Godly soul tie was a sexual one.
Cheers
LikeLike
Rian,
You don’t believe in God, and you think that the Bible is a collection of myths. Therefore by your logic, the issue of David and Jonathan being gay is a myth. Why do we need to tackle something that you believe is a myth?
LikeLike
Hey Mon…I tend to agree, except for the fact that the Intelligent Designer very deliberately created the anus and left us with no instruction as to how it was to be used.
Who’s to say the design-purpose didn’t anticipate many uses for it, including the producing of skid-marks on our knickers?
Can you think of any other way that could be achieved?
God moves in mysterious ways!
LikeLike
Come on Monica, be fair.
—> “did you know that the incidence of AIDS is still exploding in the Gay community because of their sexual practices?”
The incidence of heart disease and cancer and obesity is still exploding among the ‘Straight’ community because of THEIR undesirable practices ~ and to a large degree their sexual practices. (eg unrestrained breeding)
Do you realise the death RATE is as high among heterosexuals as it is among homosexuals.
….and that in absolute numbers the deaths of heterosexuals far exceeds that of homosexuals.
(I suspect ‘breathing’ is responsible for the death-toll: perhaps it ought to be banned.)
The argument, then, is that since god created us all (omnisciently KNOWING that some will be homosexual), and god kills heterosexuals as readily and he does homosexuals, then as far as god’s concerned there’s no difference between them as far as judgmentalism goes.
The biblical admonitions, don’t forget, were written by jews with their own agenda.
….and their own undesirable practices.
And god killed all them, too 😉
LikeLike
“The biblical admonitions, don’t forget, were written by jews with their own agenda.”
No Dabs,
“The doctrine of the inspiration of the Bible means that the Bible in the original documents is God-breathed, that it is a divine product, and, because it is divine, the original documents are inerrant.
2 Tim. 3:16-17 says, “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17 that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.” Paul who wrote this epistle was obviously referring to the entirety of the Old Testament as being inspired. The word “inspired” is literally “God-breathed.” This is an interesting phrase, since it implies that the Scriptures are from the mouth of God. Likewise, Peter says in 2 Pet. 1:21, “for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.” Notice that Peter is stating that prophecy is not the product of human will. Instead, prophecy occurs by those moved by the Holy Spirit.
The Old Testament Scriptures are clearly full of statements showing the inspiration of God through the writers. The Old Testament assumes and speaks from the perspective of divine inspiration.
What about the New Testament? Are the New Testament books inspired as well?
The Christian church has always considered the New Testament documents to be inspired. Though in the early church there were some debates on which New Testament books to include in the Bible, God worked through the Christian church to recognize those inspired works. Therefore we now have 27 inspired books for the New Testament.
In 1 Cor. 14:37 Paul said, “If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord’s commandment.” In 2 Pet. 3:16 Peter said, “as also in all [Paul’s] letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.” Also, Jesus said in John 14:26, “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you.” This means that the Lord has commissioned the apostles to accurately record what Jesus had said because the Holy Spirit would be working in them.
So, we can see that Jesus promised direction from the Holy Spirit, that Paul considered what he wrote to be the commands of God, and that Peter recognized Paul’s writings as Scripture. In addition, since the Christian Church recognizes the 27 books of the New Testament are inspired, and since we see internal claims of inspiration in the New Testament, we conclude that inspiration applies to the New Testament documents as well.”
CARM Apologetics
LikeLike
Monica, Kathleen and all,
Well, I’ve been reading with much interest the various comments here on the Pope’s statement on Homosexuality. As I’ve tried to indicate previously, the Scriptural injunctions against ‘gay’ people really cut no ice with me, since they clearly represent the thinking and understanding of those old days. And I think I gave a pretty good coverage of the argument that there are many things that we definitely know better than our forefathers of the ancient and Biblical world.
I’m sorry that my reference to David and Jonathon brought offense, Monica. But it intrigues me to observe that whereas my rejection of many matters within the Jewish and the Christian Testaments are predictably and routinely condemned or dismissed out of hand, this one reflection about the relationship between those men is taken as directly and particularly offensive.
This certainly suggests to me that regardless of the general assent I see on this blog, that homosexual actions are no more of a sin than any others, – yet somehow my presumed slur on the names and characters of two prominent ancient Biblical characters calls up the strongest reaction.
Over the twelve months I’ve been participating on this forum, I’ve read numerous comments here that I on the other hand, have found distinctly offensive. In particular this many times repeated denunciation of homosexual behaviour has hurt me, especially when I recall so many decent and oftimes spiritual persons I’ve known over the years who belong to the Gay and Lesbian community. The constant hammering of the general theme too about sin and sinful behaviour disappoints me. I feel sure that there are healthier ways of coming to grips with human issues and problems.
I have been convinced for many years now, that if dear old Augustine had not pressured the church of his day to adopt his view of the Garden of Eden story, (and thus his unique ‘Original Sin’ concept,) Christianity would be far more united and healthy than it is today. But presumably the alternative ideas of Pelagius, would not have delivered to the Chiefs of the developing church, such an effective method of controlling its Indians.
Cheers, Rian.
LikeLike
Kathleen,
Is there actually a scriptural quote that demands that one’s marriage must be blessed by God?
Rian.
LikeLike
The Bible is many books written by many people, and even where a book is supposedly by one author, it can easily have been edited to add or delete words. Jesus said or did something? Not necessarily; he was REPORTED to have said or did something.
I am reminded of a ditty –
“The Bible is God’s word, I know,
because the Bible tells me so.”
The authors were inspired by God, I believe, and wrote what God said to them, in their time, culture and given their personal understanding. Do you believe God CANNOT speak today, as He did then? The established churches teach this, that God has said all he’s ever going to say.
But perhaps the Pope has heard Him, as even you and I can if we are willing to listen, not just preach.
LikeLike
Of course God continues to speak to us today Dreamweaver,
But He will never contradict what He has already revealed to us in the Bible…..His message (the Word of God) does not change, and neither does He.
LikeLike
God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. But should we limit Him to saying only what He has revealed in the past? The Bible has instances of Him changing His mind, but apart from that we don’t know His plan, that various phases of it might call for different revelations.
LikeLike
Yes Dreamweaver,
I see your point and I agree. How can we mere mortals presume to limit God? There is no way that I believe we have the full revelation of God. I am positive that He has so much more to reveal to us. But, I choose to make the Bible my final authority. If I receive a revelation that doesn’t line up with the Word of God, then I discard it or, I’ll just shelve it away and wait and see if it comes to pass. It’s for my safety, and I am happy with that decision.
Cheers
LikeLike
What is it with you lot ~ issuing restrictions about what god can and can’t do and/or be?
For ferocious foisters of ‘Free Will’ you try to deprive god of his?
LikeLike
Dreamweaver
The ditty is actually:
“Jesus Loves me this I know,
Cos the Bible tells me so”.
Interesting how people who don’t believe in the Bible twist things out of context then accuse the Bible believing Christians of being silly.
LikeLike
You contradict yourself Dreamweaver. If the Bible authors were inspired by God, you can’t say that Jesus’ words are not reported accurately. Either they were or they weren’t.
Secondly, I would have no problem following what the Pope says, if it is according to the Bible. As a follower of Christ, I am reminded that in His conflict with the temptations of the devil, He always defended His actions with the words “It is written”, then quoted Scripture. In conflicts with the religious leaders of His day He also used Scripture to defend Himself.
LikeLike
@ davinci: Interesting how people who don’t believe in the Bible twist things out of context then accuse the Bible believing Christians of being silly.
That type of argument is called a straw man fallacy…
“The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person’s actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position.[…and condemns that person as irrational.]”
Sigh. 😦 They cannot help it, because like Satan they hate God, and so they don’t have it in their spiritual nature to say nice word about their Creator or his children. Like Satan they utter lies about their loving Creator all day long. But God will gather the grain into his storehouse and burn the straw/chaff/trash on a fire that will never go out. Hallelujah. 😆 Keep up the good work.
LikeLike
Oh Davinci! But please look at the ‘ditty’ which is a take-off of that, and do some thinking.
LikeLike
Davinci, you are quoting a children’s hymn, not a ditty, similar though it is.
LikeLike
And here’s another wanna-be dictator to elements far greater than himself –> How does Phuppie know Satan “hates God” ?
Neither does god hate Satan; they’re joint-venturers in the same industry, after all, and depend on each other for the success of the business.
The Light-Bringer, after all, is the one responsible for ‘Enlightenment’.
LikeLike
davinci,
there is no contradiction between the idea that ‘God’ inspired the Gospel writers and the idea that they might have failed to quote correctly. Inspiration doesnt necessarily get translated and quoted fully and accurately.
It would be a totally different issue if you were to claim that ‘God’ DICTATED, word by word, the actual text. Then surely on that basis and assumption, the resultant writing would be identical to the original concept in the mind of ‘God’.
Rian.
LikeLike
correction – paragraph 2 in my reply to rian should read “So you can’t use the argument that we know better than they did.”
LikeLike
Fair comment.
A few thousand years of ‘theology’ could well incline one to selective deafness. Or even actually damaged eardrums.
(Speaking as a survivor of a methodist upbringing an salvation-army bands.)
LikeLike
As an ex-Catholic I am deeply moved by Pope Francis. I believe the Catholic church has finally found a leader who truly understands Jesus’s message of grace. Sin is sin is sin is sin. The sins I think of as small and petty are just as despicable to God as are the sins of those who practice homosexual behavior. And Jesus’s love and sacrifice covers them all and grants all of us who so desire a restored relationship with God. Pope Francis appears to truly understand that Matthew 7:1 must be taken in context, More than “Do not judge or you too will be judged” it is a statement of examinig our own behaviors and applying forgiveness from that point.
Thank you for this provocative post.
LikeLike
I believe that being gay is a sin and should not be condoned by Christians, however we cannot condemn and mistreat the people either, because we are all sinners. I am sure Jesus would be all for compassion and respect. But I think something should be done about it in the church- I know that Paul took action against fornicators. I agree that it is a sticky situation and we need God’s guidance
LikeLike
Yes, God’s goodness is meant to lead us to a change of heart (repentance).
Many atheists on this blog find pleasure in dissing God’s wealth of kindness, of tolerance, and patience with them. A stupid thing to do, imho.
+++++++++++++ 😆 +++++++++++++
LikeLike
for in judging your fellow-man you condemn yourself
LikeLike
Isn’t it remarkable how much Saint Paul looks like our Bryan? 🙂
LikeLike
😆 Honestly HUP,
You’re like a broken record.
LikeLike
Jesus: Do not judge superficially, but be just in your judgements [on the Prophet HUP].
LikeLike
Yes it’ something for YOU to keep in mind Prophet.
Don’t judge people or classes of people superficially.
It is a question being asked. Why DO you refer to yourself in the third person. You refuse to answer the question. Why?
LikeLike
Gosh, don’t you know by now Bryan,
That HUP refers to himself in the third person because when the prophet speaks it is actually God speaking to us through him. Yes, I am being honest—I think he actually believes this and God help you if you reject what the prophet says. How often does he resort to accusing us of blasphemy if we give him a hard time?
LikeLike
Yes Mon that’s right And I feel another self-justifying Bible quote coming from He who can’t call himself I or me.
LikeLike
I think no advice however well meant is going to change our prophet; the more he is challenged the stronger his resolve to stick to his guns.
I believe he is where God wants him to be. If his present understanding is destroyed, what would he become?
I am sure God loves him.
LikeLike
It is apparent that several bloggers have judged the Prophet HUP to be guilty of certain sins…
…but in this instance he will follow the example of his Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ under trial, by refusing to defend himself against their unsubstantiated accusations.
+++++++++++++ 🙂 +++++++++++++
LikeLike
So now you compare yourself to Jesus. It’s nonsense. Sad. And delusional. But mostly sad.
LikeLike
The Prophet HUP is a follower of the Son of God; why is it nonsense to behave like him?
LikeLike
NEWSFLASH…You are NOT Jesus.
LikeLike
Much as it pains me to say this, I think you do Prophet HUP an injustice based on a false premise:-… “So now you compare yourself to Jesus. It’s nonsense.”
….are we not ALL the sons of god? (except the females, of course; and we know from Genesis they don’t have souls.)
LikeLike
Couldn’t answer the Prophet HUP’s simple question, eh?
As you say, the Prophet HUP is not Jesus Christ, but he really does have the Holy Spirit of Christ dwelling in him (the next best thing 😉 )…as several times previously quoted…
The Son of God’s objective is to cleanse me from all sin/wrong and thus make me perfect; that is what I, the Prophet HUP, wants; that is the plain and simple reason for his decision to become a disciple of Jesus Christ.
+++++++++++++ 🙂 +++++++++++++
LikeLike
If, as you claim, you are following the Holy Spirit’s guidance, why are you so hypercritical of others while arrogantly proclaiming you are so near perfection. And why oh why do you constantly refer to yourself in the third person? Does the “Prophet” think he is above answering such questions. Are you really that polluted and self deluded? Or are you just playing games?
LikeLike
You are imagining dark things…
LikeLike
You my friend are ignoring the obvious….and you still refuse to answer my questions. I wonder why.
LikeLike
Keep wondering…
+++++++++++++ 🙂 +++++++++++++
LikeLike
You are being ridiculous and annoying. I have better things to do than playing stupid games. Grow up.
LikeLike
HUP,
If you have been playing games with us all these many years, then it is a gross betrayal of trust.
LikeLike
There seems to be a repulsion about anal sex. Fair enough. As Rian has stated, that doesn’t have to be part of homosexuality, certainly is not with lesbians. On the other hand do you know how many heterosexual men have requested this of their wives? Or demanded, in the past when men’s marital rights were sacrosanct?
As a farmer’s daughter I frequently saw our cows mounting each other, too. It is part of nature, though not to my taste.
I also believe there are cultures where women instruct young girls how to please future husbands – with full physical rehearsals. No doubt young boys could have similar up-bringing.
LikeLike
Hi Dreamweaver,
Speaking of cows mounting each other—-well yes, we’re all sexual beings. That doesn’t make the cows lesbians though. They’re just letting everyone know that they’re hot to trot.
Would you believe that our cow mounted my poor Mum one day? 🙂
She was leaning over the outdoor bathtub that contained the animals’ drinking water, cleaning all the green mould off it, and our cow decided that my Mum’s rear end was just too much to resist. Well we were all inside the house and heard an ear-piercing scream and lo and behold, there’s our poor mum trying to balance, hanging onto the bathtub for dear life as it was tilted towards Mum and threatening to come crashing down on top of her—as well as the cow!
Honestly, we didn’t all rush out to her aid in an instant. We couldn’t, we were laughing so much at the sight of it all. But we did eventually save her.
LikeLike
Didn’t women refer to each other as cows in the 50’s as a sign of mateship?
LikeLike
“As a sign of mate ship?”
Good grief! If someone called me a cow, I’d smack them in the teeth. Well, not really, but the impulse would certainly cross my mind. 🙂
LikeLike
I don’t care what two people do with each other. As long as they leave children out of it.
LikeLike
Pingback: Pope Francis « simple & gayforward