Don’t confuse traditional marriage with other kinds of unions, says Pope

Catholic Herald ^ | January 25, 2016

[Mrs. Don-o]

You are very welcome.

[heye2monn]

Fox’s Andrew Napolitano Calls Pope Francis A “Communist” And A “Marxist” For Linking European Refugee Crisis To Global Poverty.

Judge Napolitano: “This Particular Pope ... Is Somewhere Between A Communist With A Lowercase ‘C’ And A Marxist With An Uppercase ‘M’”

[Mrs. Don-o]

Thanks for this quote. I will look up the source at First Things.

[Mrs. Don-o]

"Why did God destroy Sodom?"

I am so glad you asked this question, ebb tide! It is explicitly answered right in the words of the Holy Spirit through the Holy Prophet Ezekiel:

Ezekiel 16:49
"Now, this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy.">

[ebb tide]

Once again, you selectively quote. Here's the sentence that immediately follows your parsed paragraph:

[50] And they were lifted up, and committed abominations before me: and I took them away as thou hast seen.

[Mrs. Don-o]

I have no problem with quoting two consecutive verses. Sodomy committed "abominations". Now let's quote a bunch more verses to see the Bible says about abominations.

The Bible speaks of four sins as crying out to Heaven for vengeance:

• Shedding of Innocent Blood(Gen 4:10)
• The Sin of Sodom (Gen 18:20-21, Ezekiel 16:48-51)
• Oppression of the Poor (Ex 2:23-25)
• Defrauding Workers of a Just Wage (James 5:4.

Scripture speaks of the "sin of Sodom" being, in fact, multiple sins:

(Ezekiel 16:49-50)
Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good.

"Abomination" surely includes man-on-man sex, and that's not all it includes. Also called "abominations" in the Bible are:

• Seventeen kinds of forbidden intercourse, listed in Leviticus 18:6-23
• Making gold or silver images of a deity (Deut 7:25)
• Burning their sons and daughters (Deut 12:31)
• Cross-dressing (Deut 21:5)
• Re-marrying a wife after you have divorced her (Deut 22:4)
• worshipping Astarte, Milcom, Chimesh, or Molech (1 Kings 11:-7)

The six abominations of Proverbs 6:16-19

There are six things the Lord hates, yes, seven are an abomination to him;

• Haughty eyes,
• Lying tongues,
• Hands that shed innocent blood,
• Hearts that plots wicked schemes,
• Feet that are quick to run to evil,
• False witness who utter lies, and
• Those who sow discord among kindred.

Additionally, Scripture lists:

• (Proverbs 11:1,20)False scales, a crooked heart
• (Prov 17:15) Acquitting the wicked and condemning the just

And there's more, I just got tired of typing.

The Bible does not treat homosexuality quite differently than the other sins. In fact, both in the OT and the NT, it invariably includes it in "sin lists" with many others.

St. Paul's sin catalogues, plus St. John's line-up in Revelation, all list sexual sins in with idolatry, greed, fighting, and every other kind of sin:

• 1 Cor 6:9-10
• Gal 5:19-21
• Eph 5:3-6
• Rev. 22:12-16

Homosexual acts are acts of grave depravity. Under o circumstances can they be justified. However, I don't think we should try to isolate homosexual vice as a somehow unique kind of wickedness, nor minimize the abomination of all these other sins.

I suspect some people do that because they are not personally tempted by homosexual vice, but are tempted by many of the others. For instance, who, these days, accuses himself of "abomination" for "neglecting the poor and needy" or for "sowing discord"?

[ebb tide]

Shedding of Innocent Blood(Gen 4:10)
The Sin of Sodom (Gen 18:20-21, Ezekiel 16:48-51)
Oppression of the Poor (Ex 2:23-25)
Defrauding Workers of a Just Wage (James 5:4.

Thanks for proving my point. Otherwise, why are the third and fourth sins listed above not inclusive under the second one?

Because Sodom’s unique sin that cries out to Heaven was homo sex.

[ebb tide]

I suspect some people do that because they are not personally tempted by homosexual vice, but are tempted by many of the others.

"Some people"? Get real; over 98 percent of the humans are straight. You give the gay lobby too much credit.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Very true, ebb tide. I will amend my statement:

"I don't think we should try to isolate homosexual vice as a somehow unique kind of wickedness, nor minimize the abomination of all these other sins.

"I suspect 98% of us do that because we are not personally tempted by homosexual vice, but are tempted by many of the others."

Thank you for that improvement.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Please note again the Ezechiel verse, which was included under the "Sin of Sodom" which you quoted:

(Ezekiel 16:49-50)
"Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good."

The point is that the sins (plural) of Sodom, which were abominations, included homosexual vice, pride, avarice, gluttony, covetousness, other sexual sins, oppression of workers, neglect of the poor.

These things so commonly go together. The Prophets of Israel and the Doctors of the Church listed sexual and economic sins together. Medieval homilists, in their Lenten sermons, used to group these three: Usury, Luxury, Sodomy.

[ebb tide]

The Bible does not treat homosexuality quite differently than the other sins.

Perhaps you then can explain why Lot offered over his daughters to the men beating on his door for sex but he refused to turn over the visiting men.

Give it a rest. Homosexual sin is unnatural and a sin in itself that cries out to Heaven.

Why don't you read Genesis in full context and see exactly when God decided to destroy Sodom? It was immediately after the sodomites were beating on Lot's door for homo sex.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Before I answer your questions, you answer me this:

• In Genesis 19:4 it says the intended assault against the two angels emanated from "the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, [who] surrounded the house, both old and young, all the people from every quarter." How many of them do you suppose were homosexuals?

• If they were motivated by strictly homosexual lust, why did Lot think they would be satisfied by his two daughters instead?

• Was Lot right and just to offer the violent mob his two virgin daughters "to do with what they liked"?

BTW, homosexual sin is unnatural and a sin in itself that cries out to Heaven. Nobody here is disputing that.

[ebb tide]

>>How many of them do you suppose were homosexuals?<<

All of them.

>>Was Lot right and just to offer the violent mob his two virgin daughters “to do with what they liked”?<<

See my answer above. Lot knew they were all homos and thus knew his offer would be declined.

I was not aware you were this defensive of fudge packers.

[ebb tide]

Was Lot right and just to offer the violent mob his two virgin daughters "to do with what they liked"?

Was God right and just to order Abraham to slay his beloved son, Isaac?

[ebb tide]

Before I answer your questions, you answer me this:

I answered your questions.

Why haven't you answered mine?

[Mrs. Don-o]

(1) You said earlier today "Get real; over 98 percent of the humans are straight." That seems to conflict with you now stating that 100% of all the people of Sodom were homosexual. Perhaps you can explicate this seeming contradiction?

(2) "Lot knew they were all homos and thus knew his offer would be declined. This is not stated or even implied in the text, and in terms of motivation it makes no sense. If he knew it was pointless, he would not have made the offer. Why would he? It gains him nothing. It's quite apparent he offered his daughters to be gang-raped as a means to an end: to divert the crowd away from assaulting his angelic visitors.

(3)"You [are] ...defensive of fudge packers." Absurd. I said that homosexual acts are --- like many other sins as specified in Holy Scripture --- abominable, acts of grave depravity, and in no case can they be justified. How is that "defensive of fudge packers"?

[ebb tide]

That seems to conflict with you now stating that 100% of all the people of Sodom were homosexual.

Only in you biased mind.

Duh? Why aren't you counting Lot and his two male visitors and and his two future son-in-laws as heterosexuals in your 100% figure?

So Lot went out, and spoke to his sons in law that were to have his daughters, and said: Arise: get you out of this place, because the Lord will destroy this city.Genesis 19:14

Your continued defense of sodomy being no different than immoral heterosexual sex sickens me.

You'd be better at a being a Protestant than a Catholic; seeing the way you cherry pick the Bible to defend sodomy as no worse than immoral heterosexual sex.

P.S. When Adam and Eve were created there were 0% homosexuals.

[ebb tide]

(2) "Lot knew they were all homos and thus knew his offer would be declined. This is not stated or even implied in the text, and in terms of motivation it makes no sense. If he knew it was pointless, he would not have made the offer. Why would he? It gains him nothing. It's quite apparent he offered his daughters to be gang-raped as a means to an end: to divert the crowd away from assaulting his angelic visitors.

It's not only implied, it's obvious! Did any of those homos take up Lot's offer of his daughters.

[Mrs. Don-o]

>>How many of them do you suppose were homosexuals?<<
All of them.

Those are your words, not mine.

It's you, also, who said "Get real, over 98% of humans are straight."

So I'm just comparing one ebb tide saying with another ebb tide saying. I, myself, didn't say either of these things. I am asking you to explain your apparent contradiction.

As, perhaps you can. Who knows? I'm all ears.

"Your continued defense of sodomy being no different than immoral heterosexual sex sickens me."

This is a truly nutzoid statement. I never "defended" sodomy on any terms whatsoever. What I said, repeatedly, literally, is that it is an abomination, an act of grave depravity, and that it can not under any circumstances be justified.

Please note that heterosexuals commit sodomy, too. There are even male FReepers --- yes, right here on this forum --- who have justified sodomizing their lawful wedded wives. This is damnable, hell-bent, unnatural, comparable in some ways to contraception, sacrilege, and blasphemy. I will not name names. I hope they have left this Forum forever.

[CodeToad]

Nice list. Please keep it updated. You’re going to need it in these trying times. I, too, thought until this thread that the Pope had previously given the nod to homosexual marriage. Your list shows that is a wrong conclusion.