Posted on 02/22/2005 12:46:48 PM PST by Clint N. Suhks
He is not PC. I like that.
However,I must comment that your response to my query about invincible ignorance,while a little vague and ambiguous just as easily supports my position,thankyou.
You both need to read my posts again and ponder them. Then ask yourselves--how does this fit in with Assisi? The answer is obvious: since JPII is a universalist, he sees no reason why he shouldn't offer other religionists our altars to pray at. He believes all men are united with Christ, so why not?
It's not enough to answer God loves all men. It's not enough to say Christ died so that all men might be redeemed. The message of Redemptor Hominis goes beyond that. It is that all men are united with Christ--each and every individual by virtue of simply being human, whether atheist or agnostic or Buddhist or whatever. Everybody.
If the pair never engaged in the blatantly bad fruit of the act, how is called a marriage? Why not a really good friendship?
The concept of marriage would be significantly altered by excluding or reinterpreting of the sexual aspect.
in·sid·i·ous adj. 1. Working or spreading harmfully in a subtle or stealthy manner: insidious rumors; an insidious disease. 2. Intended to entrap; treacherous: insidious misinformation. 3. Beguiling but harmful; alluring: insidious pleasures.
Not in PetRock believers, but in those who confess with their tongue that Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of God.
The rationalizations required for a Bible believing christian to come to you conclusion are astounding.
The Pope is 100% correct.
Then let me ask you--why do we need Baptism? Why did Jesus himself tell us unless we were baptized with water and the Holy Spirit, we could not see God? What was he talking about if all men were already united to himself in some way at birth as the Pope states? And why would he urge the apostles to go forth to all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit? Clearly just being born human is not enough for salvation--so why has this part of the message gotten lost?
Pope Benedict XVI wrote this essay on homosexuality when he was still a cardinal. In it, he states clearly and succinctly why homosexual behavior and gay marriage are intrinsically evil according to traditional Catholic doctrine.
As I understand it, Catholic doctrine condemns gay marriage as evil for much the same reason that it condemns abortion as evil. Both frustrate and deny natural law that binds sexual relations to a procreative purpose.
Now that you have exhausted your logic and common sense, why not go to a higher authority and read what God himself says about homosexual behavior and about the sanctity of human life?
For one example, Romans 1:26-27 gives God's view of sex acts between people of the same gender. He calls those acts "vile affection". (vile = evil) Same-sex "marriage" compounds the evil of homosexual behavior by making a perverted mockery of the God-ordained, sacred institution of marriage.
nor can I see how abortions can be nothing more or less than murder. I give up, I'm very confused.
No need for confusion, God's word is quite clear on the matter of killing innocent humans, see Exodus 20:13. Abortion is the deliberate, premeditated killing of a living, innocent human being, and that is essentially the definition of 1st degree murder. God allows for the taking of human life under a very limited number of circumstances such as self defense, national defense in wartime, capital punishment carried out by a legitimate government, and perhaps one or two more circumstances. The deliberate killing of an innocent unborn baby for any reason is not one of those circumstances, therefore it is "nothing more or less than murder". (as is euthanasia BTW)
So you see, there's no need to be confused or to give up. All you need do is accept what God has said concerning those issues as final, absolute, unalterable truth.
---
Abortion is the deliberate, premeditated killing of a living, innocent human being
---
While I agree that it is deliberate and premeditated, think of the fetus in a more detailed sense. The fetal brain and central nervous system do not develop and become active until the eighteenth week of pregnancy - now, this varies from one mother to the next, but on average, it is 18 nonetheless - up until then, the fetus is developing towards the stage of viability. Up until the central nervous system initiates the rest of the fetus's biosystems to become active, it is not living in the sense of the word - it. is. not. functioning. Not unless it is still within the uterus and functioning off the mother's systems and unless I'm mistaken, while it's inside one's own body, the owner of said body has command over what to do with it.
---
God allows for the taking of human life under a very limited number of circumstances such as self defense, national defense in wartime, capital punishment carried out by a legitimate government, and perhaps one or two more circumstances.
---
Agreed.
Well, except for war. Wartime is justified by people with too swelled an ego and too much megalomania. The one or two other circumstances you stated as God allowing for is to save the mother's life. Not all women can survive a pregnancy to term - illnesses contributing to a very hostile environment for fetal development, inability to carry through labor, etc - and when the C-section is not an option, sorry - no pregnancy.
Before you start on how God will protect those women to save the life of the baby, as you inevitably will, stop there. I'm one of those women. I have a hoste of illnesses that render me unable to carry to term or through labor. I want kids, but can't have them because the child and I will both die. Think of that. Prayer won't help me. Extensive treatment might. God has little to nothing to do with my condition, that's a matter of genetics, medicine and whatever science develops while my bio-clock is alive.
I'm not technically pro-abortion, by the way. Just pro-choice, but with a very stringent limitation thereto. I believe that if it's a last resort only, the option should still exist.
---
He calls those acts "vile affection". (vile = evil) Same-sex "marriage" compounds the evil of homosexual behavior by making a perverted mockery of the God-ordained, sacred institution of marriage.
---
I think that the heterosexual population has succeeded in making that mockery themselves, except in a culture of no personal responsibility, not a single person wishes to acknowledge it. "Till death do us part" has evolved into "Till I find someone I'd like to screw more." Divorce is a mockery on marriage itself; last time I checked, if a couple wasn't ready for marriage, there is no need to actually exhaust money, efforts and nerves and actually throw a wedding. Cheating...geez, I don't even want to think about how many couples cheat. I'll tell you this now, if one spouse cheats, either the couple splits or the other spouse never finds out. My marriage - a heterosexual one, in case anyone here decides to nitpick - is being made into a mockery by children in the bodies of grown adults. Homosexual marriages have little to nothing to do with it.
Homosexuals are also Homo Sapiens. Just because they have sex with the same gender doesn't make them any less human than they are; I don't see how karmic senses of evil ro good can pertain to sexuality in one way or the next. The more of less logical way to see it is, stay out of other people's bedrooms. It's not your concern who does what with whom.
---
So you see, there's no need to be confused or to give up. All you need do is accept what God has said concerning those issues as final, absolute, unalterable truth.
---
No thanks. All truths are tangible from one person to the next; no two people will interpret the same phrase identically. While the Bible is a nice book for moral outlines, it's just that - a book. And need I remind you that Lot's two daughters also slept with him to have children? Some moral that promotes right there. What happened to people figuring out truth for themselves, or is independent thinking as dead as personal responsibility?
Your statements and rhetorical questions indicate that you do not accept the Judeo-Christian bible as God's word given to man, so any comments of mine concerning your post that are based on scriptural principles would fall on deaf ears. However, I will say that born again Christians (there are no other kind of true Christians, see John 3:3-4) have no need for "figuring out truth" as you mentioned in the last paragraph of your post. God's word is truth, and we can only come to know and understand many parts of his word by believing in our heart that Jesus Christ is the divine, virgin born, resurrected, eternal Son of God who sacrificed his life to atone for man's sin, and by accepting him by faith as Savior of our immortal souls and Lord of our lives. Once that relationship with God has been established by grace through faith in his Son, the believer's spiritual eyes are opened and the truth of his word comes into focus.
For anyone who believes that the bible reveals God's mind concerning sin, there can be no doubt that both abortion and homosexual acts are sins against God's moral laws. To say otherwise is to show disregard for his written word that says unjustified killing of another person, i.e., abortion, is murder, and that homosexual acts are an abomination in God's sight. But a Christian also realizes that God still loves the abortionist sinner and the homosexual sinner just the same as he loves any other lost sinner, and that he offers full pardon to ALL truly repentant sinners who will accept his offer of salvation by grace through faith in his Son.
I doubt very much that you want my prayers on your behalf. But I will nevertheless pray for God to open your heart to the truth of his word, and that he will lead you to recognize that he, and not our own intellect, is the final arbiter of right and wrong.
I disagree on the abusive part. I know Joey Batz very well and while he may take a very direct manner of speaking, I would certainly not label him as abusive nor hateful. Not everyone abides by the same manner of thinking. I've read his response and it was brillilantly argued in his point of view. I may not share it, I may not agree with it, but I always appreciate a good response in a forum.
I actually do accept the Judeo-Christian Bible, but strictly in the regards of morale. While morale varies from region to region, certain beliefs are universal: respect, honor, dignity and managing your own life without jealousy (Do not covet thy neighbor's wife I translate as manage your own and do not compare yourself with the people nearby - comparison is useless because there will always be greater and lesser people than youself.) But the detailed stances on the "hot-button topics" I decide for myself.
I also have both an agreement and a disagreement on virgin conception, but before you respond, consider my explanation of how. Biologically speaking, it's simply. not. possible. If God has created a man in His own image, then God must also have a human form. That and in accordance to basic rules of biology, there is no way that Mary of Nazareth could have conceived without having sex with someone. Or, since I also believe in ghosts, something. Since the Bible is compiled of records from multiple authors, it's likely that they too did not know the detail of how Jesus was conceived. But, since he did have a flesh-and-blood form with abilities beyond a human form, I am inclined to believe that the conception was by spiritual means. Still...I'm a very scientific person and pardon if my knowledge of the body overrides my open mind on that matter.
Nonetheless, regardless of what God believes, people should always know what to think for themselves. That is why I am not strictly religious but instead hold my mind open for right about anything. I understand the biological and piritual sides of things, but what I decide is limited to my personal opinion. That may be challenged, refuted with facts - I debate no other way - but nonetheless. I'm positive that no two people think alike and no two people would interpret a sentence the same way. Hence I say that there is no such thing as absolute truth.
Even Biblical verses are interpreted differently. I'm sure that no two people in an open-discussions Bible study class would interpret the Ten Commandments the same way either. I interpret them in my own way. The person next to me will interpret them in their own.
I'll try not to be as redundant in the future and appreciate the courtesy of a similarly courteous response.
QoS
PS: I'm open to everything. I just think for myself and if you must pray for me, please pray that my husband and I will save enough for a house. Eventually. :)
IF THIS WILL DOUBLE-POST, I AM SORRY. COMPUTER IS ACTING UP.
I disagree on the abusive part. I know Joey Batz very well and while he may take a very direct manner of speaking, I would certainly not label him as abusive nor hateful. Not everyone abides by the same manner of thinking. I've read his response and it was brillilantly argued in his point of view. I may not share it, I may not agree with it, but I always appreciate a good response in a forum.
I actually do accept the Judeo-Christian Bible, but strictly in the regards of morale. While morale varies from region to region, certain beliefs are universal: respect, honor, dignity and managing your own life without jealousy (Do not covet thy neighbor's wife I translate as manage your own and do not compare yourself with the people nearby - comparison is useless because there will always be greater and lesser people than youself.) But the detailed stances on the "hot-button topics" I decide for myself.
I also have both an agreement and a disagreement on virgin conception, but before you respond, consider my explanation of how. Biologically speaking, it's simply. not. possible. If God has created a man in His own image, then God must also have a human form. That and in accordance to basic rules of biology, there is no way that Mary of Nazareth could have conceived without having sex with someone. Or, since I also believe in ghosts, something. Since the Bible is compiled of records from multiple authors, it's likely that they too did not know the detail of how Jesus was conceived. But, since he did have a flesh-and-blood form with abilities beyond a human form, I am inclined to believe that the conception was by spiritual means. Still...I'm a very scientific person and pardon if my knowledge of the body overrides my open mind on that matter.
Nonetheless, regardless of what God believes, people should always know what to think for themselves. That is why I am not strictly religious but instead hold my mind open for right about anything. I understand the biological and piritual sides of things, but what I decide is limited to my personal opinion. That may be challenged, refuted with facts - I debate no other way - but nonetheless. I'm positive that no two people think alike and no two people would interpret a sentence the same way. Hence I say that there is no such thing as absolute truth.
Even Biblical verses are interpreted differently. I'm sure that no two people in an open-discussions Bible study class would interpret the Ten Commandments the same way either. I interpret them in my own way. The person next to me will interpret them in their own.
I'll try not to be as redundant in the future and appreciate the courtesy of a similarly courteous response.
QoS
PS: I'm open to everything. I just think for myself and if you must pray for me, please pray that my husband and I will save enough for a house. Eventually. :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.