To Be or Not to Be

[Ludwig]

There is a statistically predominant and natural identity is commonly described these days as being “straight;” a male or a female, made one for the other with the vocation and capacity of procreating and educating offspring, mutually supporting each other in marriage. Some people believe that there exists a God-given human identity other than straight.

The alternative identity they suggest is actually a variety of identities: there are those males and females made by God for the purpose of engaging in homosexual sodomy (lesbians and gays); there are those made by God for the purpose of engaging in both marital relations and homosexual sodomy (bisexuals); and there are those made by God to rebel against their natural condition of being male or female in order to re-classify and present themselves, through various bodily mutilations, as being the opposite of what, in fact, they are: this is the category of men who insist they are women and women who insist they are men (transsexuals).

The reality is that we are all created by God as human beings with a sexual faculty ordered by nature to procreative activity within marriage. Any use of that faculty apart from naturally procreative activity is a misuse of that faculty. And any inclination, penchant, or desire to engage in such a misuse of the sexual faculty is itself intrinsically disordered and must be resisted, not affirmed or celebrated.

There are not various categories of human beings based on what sexual activity they engage in or feel drawn towards. We are all one in our humanity, and God created man for woman, and woman for man and then declared His creation to be very good. To call a person a homosexual is already problematic; it implies that the person is not a heterosexual. We are all by nature heterosexual; some heterosexual people have a homosexual problem manifested in desires and/or actions. The claim of a distinct identity based on unnatural desires and behaviors cannot change reality: God’s creation is not subject to human re-engineering. There is no God-given LGBT identity. One can only pretend that there is such. To affirm someone in this make-believe self-conception is uncharitable and destructive.

The human dignity of all persons is promoted by obedience to what God has established. That dignity is wounded and obscured by any rejection of God’s plan and purpose for humanity. The just and loving way to help people who affirm an imaginary LGBT identity is to guide them away from this mistaken idea and towards an appreciation of the true nature of who they are in the sight of the Good God who calls all to love and to holiness.

[txswimmer]

Ludwig -

Great recitation of doctrine, not at all shared by all of the Christian community. Thank God.

If you don't like gay, don't do gay. But gay has been around since the dawn of man, long before your doctrine.

[Ludwig]

But gay has been around since the dawn of man, long before your doctrine.As have all manner of perversion and disorder but their longevity does not make them right nor wholesome. BTW: It's not my doctrine.

[txswimmer]

As have all manner of perversion and disorder but their longevity does not make them right nor wholesome. BTW: It's not my doctrine.

If it is not your's whose, then, whose is it? And why repeat it?

Selling and keeping slaves is condoned in the Bible. Stoning adulterers to death is condoned. Selling your daughter is condoned. Killing your son for badmouthing you is condoned. While eating shellfish, and wearing a polycotton blend are abominations.

Many things condoned in the Bible are just plain wrong. And homosexual relations are not universally condemned, any more than card playing or dancing, or drinking, in Christian doctrine. I was in shock the first time I went to communion (or the equivalent) in a Baptist church. Grape koolaid and real bread, instead of wine and wafers. GASP. In the long run, I have come to believe that a lot of our doctrinal differences don't matter a #### to God, nor to Christ.



The Bible was written by man, not the hand of God. And though inspired, humans fail. Period.

[Ludwig]

If it is not your's whose, then, whose is it? And why repeat it?I made reference to whose doctrine it is in the original. I repeat it because that is my calling.

[txswimmer]

Oh, it's God's doctrine? Guess I missed than when I read the Bible. Could you direct me to that passage?

No? Because it does not exist. The doctrine you profess is based on one (or more) Christian sect's interpretation of the Bible. And let me emphasize interpretation.

When my cousin killed himself, I remember my mother thanking God he wasn't Catholic, because he would not have been allowed a Christian burial. That doctrine of the Catholic church has somewhat been modified. Why? Maybe it's because the Church (universal) is reexamining a lot of doctrine, and has been throughout the centuries.

If the doctrine you profess is your belief, more power to you. Don't do gay. Or dance, or drink or whatever.

I do not presume to know the Mind of God. The Alpha and the Omega. My mind is finite - I cannot comprehend infinity. I search for truth based on Christ's commandment to Love. That this doctrine works for you is good - keep sharing. Just be prepared to understand when people respectfully disagree.

[Ludwig]

... I do not presume to know the Mind of God. The Alpha and the Omega. My mind is finite - I cannot comprehend infinity. I search for truth based on Christ's commandment to Love. That this doctrine works for you is good - keep sharing. Just be prepared to understand when people respectfully disagree.I suffer the same limitation and so does everyone else. That's why God (Jesus Christ) established a church and gave that church an infallible guide, the Holy Spirit. It is the mission of that church to teach. Because of my finite mind, I choose to listen to the teaching of that church which has perdured for over 2000 years, the same church which, by the way, gave us the Bible. We all have a choice. I can only hope that I have made the right one. I do not love any person less if he or she makes a different choice.

[mac]

It is the mission of that church to teach.

We all have a choice. I can only hope that I have made the right one.

I'm not so sure that anyone gave the church the mission of "teaching? I don't recall ever seeing that. To inform? Oh yeow, you bet that's a mission.

Also: You can do a lot more than "hope you made the right choice", Ludwig. You can believe and have faith that you made the right choice.....mac

[mac]

Ludwig -

Great recitation of doctrine, not at all shared by all of the Christian community. Thank God.

If you don't like gay, don't do gay. But gay has been around since the dawn of man, long before your doctrine.

Swimmer: Not all communities that profess to be "Christian Communities" are, in fact "Christian Communities", not by a long shot......mac

[mac]

If it is not your's whose, then, whose is it? And why repeat it?

Selling and keeping slaves is condoned in the Bible. Stoning adulterers to death is condoned. Selling your daughter is condoned. Killing your son for badmouthing you is condoned. While eating shellfish, and wearing a polycotton blend are abominations.

Many things condoned in the Bible are just plain wrong. And homosexual relations are not universally condemned, any more than card playing or dancing, or drinking, in Christian doctrine. I was in shock the first time I went to communion (or the equivalent) in a Baptist church. Grape koolaid and real bread, instead of wine and wafers. GASP. In the long run, I have come to believe that a lot of our doctrinal differences don't matter a #### to God, nor to Christ.



The Bible was written by man, not the hand of God. And though inspired, humans fail. Period.

I sort of agree with you on this one. I'm pretty well convinced that the greatest detractors from Christianity are Denominationalism and Doctrines.....mac

[Night Owl]

I suffer the same limitation and so does everyone else. That's why God (Jesus Christ) established a church and gave that church an infallible guide, the Holy Spirit. It is the mission of that church to teach. Because of my finite mind, I choose to listen to the teaching of that church which has perdured for over 2000 years, the same church which, by the way, gave us the Bible. We all have a choice. I can only hope that I have made the right one. I do not love any person less if he or she makes a different choice.
Not gonna beat that horse again, but there are some churches out there have billions of dollars hidden away and it is gathering dust when it should have been used to spread Gods word and not the pockets of the higher ups in those churches. Two come readily to mind. The first is the Mormons, I'll let you guess the second. Both claim to be doing Gods work when they, on the face of things, are not doing Gods work but the churches work which is to enrich themselves.

[gnatsum]

Oh, it's God's doctrine? Guess I missed than when I read the Bible. Could you direct me to that passage?

No? Because it does not exist. The doctrine you profess is based on one (or more) Christian sect's interpretation of the Bible. And let me emphasize interpretation.

When my cousin killed himself, I remember my mother thanking God he wasn't Catholic, because he would not have been allowed a Christian burial. That doctrine of the Catholic church has somewhat been modified. Why? Maybe it's because the Church (universal) is reexamining a lot of doctrine, and has been throughout the centuries.

If the doctrine you profess is your belief, more power to you. Don't do gay. Or dance, or drink or whatever.

I do not presume to know the Mind of God. The Alpha and the Omega. My mind is finite - I cannot comprehend infinity. I search for truth based on Christ's commandment to Love. That this doctrine works for you is good - keep sharing. Just be prepared to understand when people respectfully disagree.

The issue is that MANY Christians (or "Christians") seem to believe that ALLOWING certain things to be, like homosexuality, alcohol consumption, dancing, eating shellfish, etc. is tantamount to APPROVING that behaviour, and if their particular religious faith or belief says it is bad, then they tend to belief that they aren't going to Heaven...because they "allowed" gays to exist and drink alcohol at Red Lobster on the day of the Sabbath...
Putting an end to ALL ungodly things, will help them enter God's Kingdom...

[Ludwig]

I'm not so sure that anyone gave the church the mission of "teaching? I don't recall ever seeing that. To inform? Oh yeow, you bet that's a mission.You may not ever have gotten to the end of Matthew's gospel. If you had you would have read, "Then the eleven disciples (that's all that was left of the original twelve since Judas offed himself) went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them. And when they saw him, they worshiped him: but some doubted. And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye (His original church) therefore, and teach (not my word, His) all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching (ibd.) them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.


Also: You can do a lot more than "hope you made the right choice", Ludwig. You can believe and have faith that you made the right choice.....macYou're a better man than I am if you can do that. I can only hope that I will be in grace at my departure from this AO because I fall so often. I have to pray Psalm 50(51) often.

[txswimmer]

Swimmer: Not all communities that profess to be "Christian Communities" are, in fact "Christian Communities", not by a long shot......mac

I have major disagreements with some Christian sects, but I am not going to say that the members are not Christian. We can ALL be blinded by false prophets, of which there are a multitude. Many on TV. I have had to deal with priests in my own church community that fell fall short of their mission, and led many astray, causing disruption and strife within the community. Some followed them - most just wished them gone. I don't think that those that followed the errent priests were not Christian, but, alas, they were led astray. The Church is a human organization, and we all fall short of the Glory of God.

[txswimmer]

The issue is that MANY Christians (or "Christians") seem to believe that ALLOWING certain things to be, like homosexuality, alcohol consumption, dancing, eating shellfish, etc. is tantamount to APPROVING that behaviour, and if their particular religious faith or belief says it is bad, then they tend to belief that they aren't going to Heaven...because they "allowed" gays to exist and drink alcohol at Red Lobster on the day of the Sabbath...
Putting an end to ALL ungodly things, will help them enter God's Kingdom...

Is slavery ungodly? Is killing your son because he badmouths you ungodly? Is stoning the adulterer ungodly? Is divorce ungodly? Faith in the redemptive Grace of Christ is what makes us Christian. How to lead a godly life depends on interpretation of scripture. Are we bound to follow the 600+ commandments of the Torah? An early Christian view was that belief in Christ did not absolve us from following Jewish law. Peter was big on it - James was big on it - Paul was not. Paul won.

Personally, I sin if I drink, because it is horrendous for me and almost killed me. I was saved from that, and to drink would be to turn my back on God. But that is MY sin - no one else's, in my book. Jesus turned water into wine. I think people drank a lot at the wedding, they ran out, so He made more. But, some Christians believe it absolutely forbidden to imbibe. Good for them, I guess.

My point is that we are going to disagree in the Christian community about what is Godly or ungodly. It is above my pay grade to judge anyone's immortal soul. On the other hand, those that believe I have erred, and pray for me with love (as would Ludwig), I appreciate. I will thank someone for a prayer any day.

[sojourner truth]

Sin is against God... It may effect the ones being sinned at, but in the end, all sin is towards God.

[mac]

[QUOTE=txswimmer;500881 Is divorce ungodly? .[/QUOTE]

Well Swimmer, breaking your marriage is breaking a promise to God.......so, you tell me, Swimmer, is that "unGodly" or not?........mac

[mac]

Amen.

You're a better man than I am if you can do that. I can only hope that I will be in grace at my departure from this AO because I fall so often. I have to pray Psalm 50(51) often.

well Ludwig, I'm not a "better man", but I definitely know that I am, through grace, saved and will see the Savior in heaven........if jewels and crowns are like "chevrons, i'll prob'ly be a slick sleeve but that's OK...

thanx, for the response on "teaching"......mac

[txswimmer]

Well Swimmer, breaking your marriage is breaking a promise to God.......so, you tell me, Swimmer, is that "unGodly" or not?........mac

Good question.......... If a man beats his wife severely, what is she too do? Some Christians say keep the marriage. Some say divorce is more than acceptable. You tell me - when is it godly to divorce? When is it ungodly?

[mac]

Good question.......... If a man beats his wife severely, what is she too do? Some Christians say keep the marriage. Some say divorce is more than acceptable. You tell me - when is it godly to divorce? When is it ungodly?

not sure I can answer that. obviously the Christlike thing to do is to forgive him......but if that happened to one of my girls, I kind of think they'd leave him and come home to her parents.....and leave the rest of it up to me........mac

[Ludwig]

Good question.......... If a man beats his wife severely, what is she too do? Some Christians say keep the marriage. Some say divorce is more than acceptable. You tell me - when is it godly to divorce? When is it ungodly?

As to divorce, Jesus has already spoken clearly in that regard. "I say unto you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery (Matthew 5:32)." So the issue is not divorce but rather what one does thereafter.

No Christian community that I am aware of would require a spouse to remain under the roof of an abusive spouse. That would not be safe for the spouses and not safe for the children. The thing that needs to be looked at is the marriage itself.

If it is simply a civil event undertaken before a JP or such, then it's not even a marriage in the Biblical sense of the term and such a couple is free to split at any time for any reason with the courts determining the distribution of assets and disposition of children.

If the couple entered into a covenant relationship by taking valid vows before God, then they can, for good reason, live apart from each other even through civil legal divorce, but they remain under the bond of that vow and thus are not free to marry or have sexual relations with another without being answerable to God for the sin of adultery.

[mac]

As to divorce, Jesus has already spoken clearly in that regard. "I say unto you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery (Matthew 5:32)." So the issue is not divorce but rather what one does thereafter.

No Christian community that I am aware of would require a spouse to remain under the roof of an abusive spouse. That would not be safe for the spouses and not safe for the children. The thing that needs to be looked at is the marriage itself.

If it is simply a civil event undertaken before a JP or such, then it's not even a marriage in the Biblical sense of the term and such a couple is free to split at any time for any reason with the courts determining the distribution of assets and disposition of children.

If the couple entered into a covenant relationship by taking valid vows before God, then they can, for good reason, live apart from each other even through civil legal divorce, but they remain under the bond of that vow and thus are not free to marry or have sexual relations with another without being answerable to God for the sin of adultery.

yep, agree completely..........mac

[gnatsum]

Some faiths consider a wedding in the church to be more holy and/or sacrosanct, than a wedding held in the office of a Justice of the Peace. And groups like the Jesus Christ Church of Latter-Day Saints (the Mormons) have a "tier" above a church wedding--a wedding in a Mormon Temple.
I'm guessing that a church means that the ceremony took place "in the eyes of the Lord", whereas a wedding administered by a JP is...well, God was busy "being" at all of the church weddings out there...

There was a story several years ago in Fort Worth about a man who left the Catholic seminary just before he was to be brought into the priesthood (my brain slipped, and couldn't think of the correct word for it...sort of like "graduation", but not.) to marry a young woman. Marriage took place in a JP's office, They had a daughter together, but the marriage later failed (her infidelity...), and then the wife died of cancer. The man, after some introspection on what to do with his life, he decided to rejoin the Catholic priesthood. The diocese contacted the higher-ups on what to do, and it was eventually decided to let the man become a priest, based on his past seminary, Just a few things left to do. The Catholic Church "decided" that since the man's wedding was not in a Catholic Church, then he was almost as good as not being married in the first place?

[txswimmer]

As to divorce, Jesus has already spoken clearly in that regard. "I say unto you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery (Matthew 5:32)." So the issue is not divorce but rather what one does thereafter.

No Christian community that I am aware of would require a spouse to remain under the roof of an abusive spouse. That would not be safe for the spouses and not safe for the children. The thing that needs to be looked at is the marriage itself.

If it is simply a civil event undertaken before a JP or such, then it's not even a marriage in the Biblical sense of the term and such a couple is free to split at any time for any reason with the courts determining the distribution of assets and disposition of children.

If the couple entered into a covenant relationship by taking valid vows before God, then they can, for good reason, live apart from each other even through civil legal divorce, but they remain under the bond of that vow and thus are not free to marry or have sexual relations with another without being answerable to God for the sin of adultery.

And the doctrine of the Roman Catholic community is clear......

Here is an Episcopalian's view:

CANON 19: Of Regulations Respecting Holy Matrimony: Concerning Preservation of Marriage, Dissolution of Marriage, and Remarriage
Sec. 1. When marital unity is imperiled by dissension, it shall be the duty, if possible, of either or both parties, before taking legal action, to lay the matter before a Member of the Clergy; it shall be the duty of such Member of the Clergy to act first to protect and promote the physical and emotional safety of those involved and only then, if it be possible, to labor that the parties may be reconciled.

We allow for divorce and remarriage, knowing that the issue of when to stay in a marriage or dissolve it is one that has no simple answer.

Interesting that Jimmy Carter said that he was guilty of adultery, because he "lusted in his heart". So, could Rosalyn divorce him?

Does God really want a woman to stay within the bonds of marriage at the hands of a tyrant? For some, I guess that is their belief. Just not mine.

[sojourner truth]

Once had an old Baptist buddy who had a philosophy about this. He said he has seen women who he thought were "handsome ladies" but that anything past that was probably going to get him in trouble with the Lord.

I have found that to be a good philosophy over the years.

[Ludwig]

...The Catholic Church "decided" that since the man's wedding was not in a Catholic Church, then he was almost as good as not being married in the first place?The decision that such a marriage is not valid was not made based on this particular case. JP marriage has never been equivalent of the sacrament of matrimony. The marriage was not an issue anyway since the spouse had died.

[mac]

JP marriage has never been equivalent of the sacrament of matrimony.

even if it's consumated?......mac

was the marriage 'tween Mary and Joseph equivalent to your "sacrament of matrimony"? Some real smart people say that their wedding was officiated and completed by a JP...............(and no, I do not mean Jewish Priest).....mac

[mac]

Does God really want a woman to stay within the bonds of marriage at the hands of a tyrant?

no sir, he only wants her to subject herself to him...........but failing that, to separate herself from the tyrant.....that's a whole lot different than "divorce".....mac

[Ludwig]

Hitler and his fellow Nazis also had a God-like gift. They could see that the Nazi Revolution in Germany was “on the right side of history.” And if you lived in Germany in the 1930s, you’d have had a hard time disagreeing with this, so overwhelming was the endorsement given to the Nazi Revolution by Germany’s great progressive propaganda machine (GPPM) – that is to say, Germany’s press, universities, and entertainment industry.

Likewise, America’s current GPPM has given its overwhelming endorsement to same-sex marriage, not to mention its overwhelming endorsement of abortion and, more recently, transgenderism.

In fact, of course, nobody can see the remote future (not even, I suspect, those many people who are telling us exactly what will happen 100 years from now due to climate change). Our American cultural elites were not currently passing through an era (temporary I hope) of cultural madness.

If we want to know the difference between right and wrong, I humbly suggest that we use two old-fashioned ways of doing so. We might listen (a) to the voice of Divine Revelation or (b) to the voice of the moral law within us (often called the natural law). If we listen hard we will hear both of them telling us that same-sex marriage among many other things is not only wrong, but preposterously wrong.