/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

I'm still wondering how a bagpipe managed to nail that shit to the door.

>>547802

>Largest Denomination

>BTFO

>And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.

>>547802

you say this amidst female priest ordinations in the anglican/lutherans denoms

>>547802

Enjoy your LGBTQi Priests, prottie.

>>547802

>>people actually belive this

Pls be troll

>>547864

I still don't know what's wrong with that quote.

What's wrong with homosexuals searching for God and ultimately repenting their sins?

>>547868

>I still don't know what's wrong with that quote

APOSTOLICS YES!

>>547837

I don't mean to be that guy but the catholic sect seems to have a few to many lgbt members larping as heteros…

>>547868

>I still don't know what's wrong with that quote.

>Who am I to judge?

<Since the Roman Pontiff, by the divine right of the apostolic primacy, governs the whole Church, we likewise teach and declare that he is the supreme judge of the faithful

t. Vatican 1

>>547879

1. Look at the entirety of the quote, he is urging them to come back to the Church and to repent from their sins in the confessional.

2. Also, I'd recommend looking at the original sources for his homilies on the vatican.va website, the translations into English can sometimes be botched8.

>>547872

You're right. We should stone homos just like Christ stoned that adulterous women, right?

>>547878

What do you mean?

>>547893

That adulterous woman was repentant

>>547926

That priest Francis was referring to was repentant.

>>547804

>Denomination

You mean sect.

>>547802

>Protestants still squabbles amongst themselves with their interpretations collapsing on each other since their foundations are their own subjective biases of what Scripture means

>BTFO'ing anything anytime

>>547926

>That adulterous woman was repentant

John 8:3-14

3 Now the Scribes and Pharisees brought a woman caught in adultery, and setting her in the midst,

4 said to him, "Master, this woman has just now been caught in adultery.

5 And in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such persons. What, therefore, dost thou say?"

6 Now they were saying this to test him, in order that they might be able to accuse him. But Jesus, stooping down, began to write with his finger on the ground.

7 But when they continued asking him, he raised himself and said to them, "Let him who is without sin among you be the first to cast a stone at her."

8 And again stooping down, he began to write on the ground.

9 But hearing this, they went away, one by one, beginning with the eldest. And Jesus remained alone, with the woman standing in the midst.

10 And Jesus, raising himself, said to her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned thee?"

11 She said, "No one, Lord." Then Jesus said, "Neither will I condemn thee. Go thy way, and from now on sin no more."

Where does it say the woman repented? Jesus tells her to repent. It doesn't say whether she did.

>>547932

Romans 13

Also are you all seriously implying the death penalty should be abolished with this? Should civilization just stop enforcing law completely because of John 8? NAP? I'm genuinely interested now, not trying to condescend you or anything.

>>547935

>Romans 13

On a personal level I am not a fan of the death penalty. I do believe it should be abolished on nonreligious grounds. My personal convictions, however, are irrelevant. There is a distinction between religious and civil authority recognized in the Bible. The mob here were Jews attempting to exact religious law. In contrast, the Roman Empire operated as the legitimate civil authority.

Civil authorities have God given power to execute and the free will to determine what will be punished and what won't be. Religious authorities do not have the power to execute nor to determine what will be punished.

>>547942

I see nothing wrong with supporting the enactment of civil laws in line with God's moral law. I see nothing wrong with supporting, even demanding a death penalty for the sodomites for instance. In fact all our generations before us did, until around the 1960's. But it still should be upon proven guilt of it in a court of law, not mob rule.

>>547942

This end run was used to burn "heretics" as they were turned over to civil authorities for due punishment.

>>547947

see

>>547948

Enacting civil law with God's moral law is only good if you agree with the dominant side. God does not prohibit it, obviously. But humans are flawed, and we have been known to manipulate religious authority to justify terrible things.

>>547948

Were they found guilty in a civil court or not? I also believe in separation of church from state; but that isn't the same as separation of citizens from their state. Sodomy isn't a belief, it's a pernicious disease that thrives and spreads on abuse of children. We have been lied to about this today.

>>547928

Repentant people don't identify as "gay"

>>547952

>Repentant people don't identify as "gay"

So we should kill them before they come to God? We should kill them before they get a chance to repent?

>>547954

I'll tell you what we shouldn't do, we shouldn't just smile to ourselves and say "Who am I to judge?"

>>547956

We should rightfully expect the law to send them to a far away place where we won't have to deal with them and make waves whenever and wherever this doesn't happen. They, queers, are all mentally depraved predators, abusers, and there is no place for them: and this is something all of our ancestors rightly knew. They could come for your children or anyone's, so it's not a private concern. And I refuse to look the other way on this.

>>547956

>I'll tell you what we shouldn't do, we shouldn't just smile to ourselves and say "Who am I to judge?"

Matthew 7:1-3

>1 "Do not judge, that you may not be judged. >2 For with what judgment you judge, you shall be judged; and with what measure you measure, it shall be measured to you.

>3 But why dost thou see the speck in thy brother's eye, and yet dost not consider the beam in thy own eye?

Luke 6:37

>"Do not judge, and you shall not be judged; do not condemn, and you shall not be condemned. Forgive, and you shall be forgiven.

John 8:7

>"Let him who is without sin among you be the first to cast a stone at her."

James 4:12-13a

>12 There is one Lawgiver and Judge, he who is able to destroy and to save.

>13 But thou who judgest thy neighbor, who art thou?

What did He mean by this?

>>547959

That you shouldn't attempt to figure out how to judge them yourself.

Romans 2:2

>But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things.

>>547959

>>>/rchristianity/

>>547960

Romans 2:3-8

>3 But dost thou think, O man who judgest those who do such things and dost the same thyself, that thou wilt escape the judgment of God?

4 Or dost thou despise the riches of his goodness and patience and long-suffering? Dost thou not know that the goodness of God is meant to lead thee to repentance?

5 But according to thy hardness and unrepentant heart, thou dost treasure up to thyself wrath on the day of wrath and of the revelation of the just judgment of God,

6 who will render to every man according to his works.

God will render to man according to his sins. Man cannot.

>>547960

And you may ask "what judgement?" "what things?"

Read Romans 1:24-32.

>>547961

Come to Jesus. Let him turn your heart of stone into a heart of flesh. Let Jesus teach you how to love your neighbor.

>>547964

Romans 1:24-32

1 Corinthians 6:9-11

>9 Or do you not know that the unjust will not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err; neither fornicators, nor idolators, nor adulterers,

>10 nor the effeminate, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor the evil-tongued, nor the greedy will possess the kingdom of God.

>11 And such were some of you, but you have been washed, you have been sanctified, you have been justified in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God.

Be like Jesus. Tell them to "go and sin no more." Do not condemn them for you are a sinner too. Repentance and salvation is not unattainable for them or any one else. This is the Gospel.

>>547966

The word of God says abusers of themselves with mankind there.

1 Corinthians 10:13

>There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man:

Notice, it's the same epistle. He could not have been talking about Romans 1:24-32. Because we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things— i.e. that they are of a reprobate mind as Romans 1:28 says. Meaning unable to believe. And 1 Corinthians 10:13 confirms this and thereby proves that your favored translation of 1 Corinthians 6:9 is wrong and mine is correct.

>>547968

Also I should add that sodomites are still listed as condemned. In Revelation 22:15, they are called dogs, hearkening back to Deuteronomy 23:17-18 where sodomites are directly equated to dogs. It's not the same.

>>547969

And also if that wasn't enough, the list of condemned in Revelation 21:8 is the same list as the one in Revelation 22:15, except that instead of "dogs," it adds "the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable."

>>547800

lol I posted the Theses on my Cucklic professor. Bet he'll like it 'cause he's not really Catholic. Hope he actually noticed it~

>>547973

*professor's door, kek

>>547968

>The word of God says abusers of themselves with mankind there

>muh KJV

Paul wrote: ἀρσενοκοῖται. That literally says "manbed" It means homosexual, despite however you privately interpret the KJV. http://biblehub.com/interlinear/1_corinthians/6-9.htm

Paul was absolutely talking about homosexuals there. Besides. "abusers of themselves with mankind" refers to two people. the abuser themself and mankind. how do two people "abuse themselves with mankind" together?

1 Cor. 10:13

13 May no temptation take hold of you but such as man is equal to. God is faithful and will not permit you to be tempted beyond your strength, but with the temptation will also give you a way out that you may be able to bear it.

Huh… funny how you didn't quote the rest. Seems pretty common for men to desire the sins of the flesh.

>In Revelation 22:15, they are called dogs

Jesus calls the Gentiles dogs as well. Matthew 15:21-28. But what happens? Through the woman's faith, she is saved.

I do not deny that homosexuals are damned. I absolutely reject that they cannot be saved if they repent. Moreover, even if they cannot repent, it is still not our place to condemn them.

>>547964

not slighting you blud - but you could cover the manhandling of Matt 7:1's 'Judge Not…' by simply reading a couple more verses and taking our friend to verse 6

… where in almost the same breath we see The Lord command His disciples to employ their discernment - or 'judgement' - so that they recognise who are the dogs and pigs from whom they should refrain from sharing Holy things with

so while The Lord is warning His followers that they will be treated as harshly as they treat others - which is paralleled just as few verses later in v.12 where we see the prescription to 'do unto others as you would wish them do unto you' - we see a direct commandment from Christ to discriminate between believers and unbelievers; and not offer to them the most glorious truths to trample down, affording them a license to turn and attack: since they believe themselves fully acquainted with the entirety of Christ's gospel

nb: this command echoes Proverbs 26:4 where we are told not to answer a fool in his folly lest one becomes like him - swiftly followed by the injunction to answer a fool as much as his folly deserves, lest he be wise in his own eyes

tl;dr if someone quotes the 'Don't Judge' thing out of context, you're either dealing with the ignorant or the wilfully ignorant

>>547975

>how do two people "abuse themselves with mankind" together?

Through prostitution. It's not the same as lusting after strange flesh, which is described in Romans 1:26-28.

>Huh… funny how you didn't quote the rest.

I was hoping you would so I could quote 2 Peter 2:6-9.

<And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;

<And delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked:

<(For that righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful deeds;)

<The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished:

Notice, the Lord miraculously delivered Lot out of the temptations, but the original sodomites were all reserved for judgment. It doesn't get any more obvious and directly related to 1 Corinthians 10:13, which is addressed specifically to the Corinthians as you yourself already said. The Corinthians were delivered from those kind of temptations, but the unjust weren't. Just like the Our Father prayer says.

>Seems pretty common for men to desire the sins of the flesh.

Sure but not strange flesh.

Romans 1:26

<For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

Jude 1:7

<Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

>Moreover, even if they cannot repent, it is still not our place to condemn them.

Yes, but again, Romans 2:2. It is not our place to judge contrary to what God has said.

>>547976

>manhandling of Matt 7:1

It's in knowing the difference between discerning for your own wellbeing of your own family versus making stuff up based on your personal appraisal of the situation. I didn't think all sodomites were like this, I thought there might still be exceptions, until someone pointed out Romans 1 to me, now I believe God's word about it. And it only makes more sense every day with what's happening.

>>547977

>Through prostitution.

If Paul meant prostitution, he would have written πόρνῃ not ἀρσενοκοῖται, like he did in 1 Cor 6:16. They are two different words with two different meanings. Your misunderstanding of what Paul wrote is driving you into error, friend.

>>547980

I understand and fully acknowledge 1 Corinthians 10:13 and Hebrews 4:15. The question is, do you.

>>547981

Do you understand the difference between πόρνῃ and ἀρσενοκοῖται ?

>>547985

Hebrews 4:15 is part of your Bible right?

Do you think Jesus was also tempted by sodomite lust?

i've just realised i came in far too late to this conversation and the sheer volume of tangents, rabbit trails, and red-herrings is too much to get engage with, so i'd quite like to stop being in this ITT thread now kthxbai

>>547987

>Do you think Jesus was also tempted by sodomite lust?

I believe Jesus died for the sins of the whole world. John 1:29; 1 John 2:2.

I believe Jesus bore our sins on the cross in our place. 1 Peter 2:24

I believe God's love is infinite. Psalm 107:1

I believe Christ’s power is infinite Colossians 1:16–17.

I believe homosexuality is a sin. 1 Cor. 6:10.

I believe there is only one unforgivable sin. Mark 3:28-29.

I believe sodomites have been washed, sanctified, and justified in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 1 Cor. 6:10-11.

I believe we can be cleansed of all unrighteousness. 1 John 1:9

I believe God wants all to be saved. 1 Tim. 2:3-4.

I believe that God wants all to come to repentance. 2 Pet. 3:9.

By logical necessity, I believe Jesus suffered with sexual temptations, both homosexual and heterosexual and did not sin, that all might be saved.

I believe, therefore, that homosexuals can be saved if they repent, just as all might be saved if they repent.

>>548003

I've sinned in asking this. I didn't think you would actually say yes. I will have to rethink my ways, my last comment wasn't worth it.

>>547800

f

>>548003

>I believe Jesus suffered with sexual temptations, both homosexual and heterosexual

Blasphemy

>>548003

To add to that, Christ has no inner temptations for his nature was not fallen. Thus, all his temptations was external, od devil. And if someone will say that satan would restrict himself in vaerity of temptations he presents it is clear sign of being under demonic influence.

>>548011

>Satan wouldn't give Jesus homosexual sexual temptations

Satan would anything to discredit Jesus tbh

>>548003

Blasphemy

>>547952

Yes they do. Homosexual temptation is lifelong, this is official catholic doctrine. It's not a choice, therefore referring to oneself as 'gay' (which is a synonym for homosexual) is not a problem.

You're just a hateful person who wants to act as judge over others' sins.