Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

12 Claims Every Catholic Should Be Able to Answer: Claim #8
CERC ^ | 2003 | DEAL HUDSON

Posted on 01/14/2015 2:44:38 PM PST by NYer

Freedom of speech is a great thing. Unfortunately, it comes at an unavoidable price: When citizens are free to say what they want, theyll sometimes use that freedom to say some pretty silly things. And thats the case with the 12 claims were about to cover.

petersaint.jpg

Some of them are made over and over, others are rare. Either way, while the proponents of these errors are free to promote them, we as Catholics have a duty to respond.

8.  "Properly interpreted, the Bible does not condemn homosexuality. Rather, it weighs against promiscuity — whether homosexual or heterosexual. Therefore, we have no reason to oppose loving homosexual relationships."

As homosexual activity gains greater acceptance in our culture, there'll be more pressure among Christians to explain away the Bible's clear prohibition against it. It's now the standard liberal party line to claim that the Bible — when understood correctly — doesn't disallow homosexual activity.

But this claim flies in the face of clear passages in both the Old and New Testaments. The first, of course, is the famous story of Sodom and Gomorrah. If you recall, two angels were sent by God to Sodom to visit Lot:

"But before [the angels] lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both young and old, all the people to the last man, surrounded the house; and they called to Lot, 'Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, that we may know them.' Lot went out of the door to the men, shut the door after him, and said, 'I beg you, my brothers, do not act so wickedly. Behold, I have two daughters who have not known man; let me bring them out to you, and do to them as you please; only do nothing to these men, for they have come under the shelter of my roof.' But they said, 'Stand back!' And they said, 'This fellow came to sojourn, and he would play the judge! Now we will deal worse with you than with them.' Then they pressed hard against the man Lot, and drew near to break the door. But the men put forth their hands and brought Lot into the house to them, and shut the door." (Genesis 19:4-10)

The message of this passage is pretty clear. The men of Sodom were homosexuals who wanted to have relations with the men inside the house. Lot offered them his daughters, but they weren't interested. Shortly thereafter, Sodom was destroyed by God in payment for the sins of its people — namely, their homosexual acts. This fact is confirmed in the New Testament:

"Just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise acted immorally and indulged in unnatural lust, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire." (Jude 7)

But these certainly aren't the only passages in the Bible that condemn gay activity. The Old Testament contains another unambiguous condemnation: "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination." (Leviticus 18:22).

And these statements aren't reserved to the Old Testament alone.

"For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error." (Romans 1:26-27)

It's awfully hard for a liberal Christian to explain this away. There's simply no mention here merely of gay promiscuity or rape; rather, Paul is weighing against any homosexual relations (which he describes as "unnatural," "shameless" and "dishonorable").

Liberal Christians are in a bind. How, after all, does one harmonize homosexuality with the Bible? Their solution, it appears, is to strip the Bible of its moral power, and run in rhetorical circles trying to escape its clear message.


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; Theology
KEYWORDS: homosexualagenda
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last

Early Teachings on Homosexuality

Some argue that neither the Bible nor apostolic tradition condemns the practice of homosexuality. Passages such as Leviticus 18:22–30, Romans 1:26–27, 1 Corinthians 6:9, and Jude 7 serve as ample proof that Scripture indeed condemns homosexuality. Below is ample proof from tradition. The Fathers are especially harsh against the practice of pederasty, the homosexual corruption of boys by men. 

 

The Didache

"You shall not commit murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not commit pederasty, you shall not commit fornication, you shall not steal, you shall not practice magic, you shall not practice witchcraft, you shall not murder a child by abortion nor kill one that has been born" (Didache 2:2 [A.D. 70]). 

 

Justin Martyr

"[W]e have been taught that to expose newly-born children is the part of wicked men; and this we have been taught lest we should do anyone harm and lest we should sin against God, first, because we see that almost all so exposed (not only the girls, but also the males) are brought up to prostitution. And for this pollution a multitude of females and hermaphrodites, and those who commit unmentionable iniquities, are found in every nation. And you receive the hire of these, and duty and taxes from them, whom you ought to exterminate from your realm. And anyone who uses such persons, besides the godless and infamous and impure intercourse, may possibly be having intercourse with his own child, or relative, or brother. And there are some who prostitute even their own children and wives, and some are openly mutilated for the purpose of sodomy; and they refer these mysteries to the mother of the gods" (First Apology 27 [A.D. 151]). 

 

Clement of Alexandria

"All honor to that king of the Scythians, whoever Anacharsis was, who shot with an arrow one of his subjects who imitated among the Scythians the mystery of the mother of the gods . . . condemning him as having become effeminate among the Greeks, and a teacher of the disease of effeminacy to the rest of the Scythians" (Exhortation to the Greeks 2 [A.D. 190]). 

"[According to Greek myth] Baubo [a female native of Eleusis] having received [the goddess] Demeter hospitably, reached to her a refreshing draught; and on her refusing it, not having any inclination to drink (for she was very sad), and Baubo having become annoyed, thinking herself slighted, uncovered her shame, and exhibited her nudity to the goddess. Demeter is delighted with the sight—pleased, I repeat, at the spectacle. These are the secret mysteries of the Athenians; these Orpheus records" (ibid.). 

"It is not, then, without reason that the poets call him [Hercules] a cruel wretch and a nefarious scoundrel. It were tedious to recount his adulteries of all sorts, and debauching of boys. For your gods did not even abstain from boys, one having loved Hylas, another Hyacinthus, another Pelops, another Chrysippus, another Ganymede. Let such gods as these be worshipped by your wives, and let them pray that their husbands be such as these—so temperate; that, emulating them in the same practices, they may be like the gods. Such gods let your boys be trained to worship, that they may grow up to be men with the accursed likeness of fornication on them received from the gods" (ibid.). 

... 

"In accordance with these remarks, conversation about deeds of wickedness is appropriately termed filthy [shameful] speaking, as talk about adultery and pederasty and the like" (The Instructor6, ca. A.D. 193). 

"The fate of the Sodomites was judgment to those who had done wrong, instruction to those who hear. The Sodomites having, through much luxury, fallen into uncleanness, practicing adultery shamelessly, and burning with insane love for boys; the All-seeing Word, whose notice those who commit impieties cannot escape, cast his eye on them. Nor did the sleepless guard of humanity observe their licentiousness in silence; but dissuading us from the imitation of them, and training us up to his own temperance, and falling on some sinners, lest lust being unavenged, should break loose from all the restraints of fear, ordered Sodom to be burned, 
pouring forth a little of the sagacious fire on licentiousness; lest lust, through want of punishment, should throw wide the gates to those that were rushing into voluptuousness. Accordingly, the just punishment of the Sodomites became to men an image of the salvation which is well calculated for men. For those who have not committed like sins with those who are punished, will never receive a like punishment" (ibid., 8). 

 

Tertullian

"[A]ll other frenzies of the lusts which exceed the laws of nature, and are impious toward both [human] bodies and the sexes, we banish, not only from the threshold but also from all shelter of the Church, for they are not sins so much as monstrosities" (Modesty 4 [A.D. 220]). 

 

Novatian

"[God forbade the Jews to eat certain foods for symbolic reasons:] For that in fishes the roughness of scales is regarded as constituting their cleanness; rough, and rugged, and unpolished, and substantial, and grave manners are approved in men; while those that are without scales are unclean, because trifling, and fickle, and faithless, and effeminate manners are disapproved. Moreover, what does the law mean when it . . . forbids the swine to be taken for food? It assuredly reproves a life filthy and dirty, and delighting in the garbage of vice. . . . Or when it forbids the hare? It rebukes men deformed into women" (The Jewish Foods 3 [A.D. 250]). 

 

Cyprian of Carthage

"[T]urn your looks to the abominations, not less to be deplored, of another kind of spectacle. . . . Men are emasculated, and all the pride and vigor of their sex is effeminated in the disgrace of their enervated body; and he is more pleasing there who has most completely broken down the man into the woman. He grows into praise by virtue of his crime; and the more he is degraded, the more skillful he is considered to be. Such a one is looked upon—oh shame!—and looked upon with pleasure. . . . Nor is there wanting authority for the enticing abomination . . . that Jupiter of theirs [is] not more supreme in dominion than in vice, inflamed with earthly love in the midst of his own thunders . . . now breaking forth by the help of birds to violate the purity of boys. And now put the question: Can he who looks upon such things be healthy-minded or modest? Men imitate the gods whom they adore, and to such miserable beings their crimes become their religion" (Letters 1:8 [A.D. 253]). 

"Oh, if placed on that lofty watchtower, you could gaze into the secret places—if you could open the closed doors of sleeping chambers and recall their dark recesses to the perception of sight—you would behold things done by immodest persons which no chaste eye could look upon; you would see what even to see is a crime; you would see what people embruted with the madness of vice deny that they have done, and yet hasten to do—men with frenzied lusts rushing upon men, doing things which afford no gratification even to those who do them" (ibid., 1:9).  Read More.

1 posted on 01/14/2015 2:44:38 PM PST by NYer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick; GregB; SumProVita; narses; bboop; SevenofNine; Ronaldus Magnus; tiki; Salvation; ...
For an even more in-depth analysis of the Church's position on homosexuality, go HERE

Ping!

2 posted on 01/14/2015 2:46:00 PM PST by NYer (Without justice - what else is the State but a great band of robbers? - St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Lot was an SOB to offer up his daughters to be gangraped by the whole town.


3 posted on 01/14/2015 2:50:52 PM PST by Impy (They pull a knife, you pull a gun. That's the CHICAGO WAY, and that's how you beat the rats!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Impy

There’s a parallel episode in Judges 19, the story of the Levite’s concubine. The men in that case actually gave the woman to the mob in order to protect themselves.


4 posted on 01/14/2015 2:53:52 PM PST by Tax-chick ("A war is not over until the enemy stops fighting." ~ Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Leviticus 20:13 ... just saying.


5 posted on 01/14/2015 3:20:07 PM PST by SkyDancer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

There’s a “gays for Jesus” guy on local public access television who claims that if you oppose homosexuality, you must embrace the Mosaic law in its entirety, or you’re a hypocrite.


6 posted on 01/14/2015 4:00:05 PM PST by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
"It's awfully hard for a liberal Christian to explain this away."

The gays-for-Jesus guy (referenced in an earlier post) claims that all Biblical criticisms of homosexuality are really only condemnations of male temple prostitution. I find his arguments unconvincing and dishonest. (There IS such a condemnation of this sort of prostitution, but it is separate from all the other condemnations of homosexuality in general.)
7 posted on 01/14/2015 4:10:12 PM PST by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

#8 is wrong! Good grief, what do they think we are stupid?


8 posted on 01/14/2015 4:36:07 PM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Holy blasphemy and abominations, Batman.


9 posted on 01/14/2015 5:04:49 PM PST by 9thLife ("Life is a military endeavor..." -- Pope Francis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
8. "Properly interpreted, the Bible does not condemn homosexuality. Rather, it weighs against promiscuity — whether homosexual or heterosexual. Therefore, we have no reason to oppose loving homosexual relationships."

********************************

Who said this?

10 posted on 01/14/2015 5:09:50 PM PST by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steve_Seattle
The gays-for-Jesus guy (referenced in an earlier post) claims that all Biblical criticisms of homosexuality are really only condemnations of male temple prostitution. I find his arguments unconvincing and dishonest

It is dishonest. Now that we are free from the law, there is a New Testamant commandment against sexual immorality in 1 Thess 4:1-8.

11 posted on 01/14/2015 5:21:28 PM PST by aimhigh (1 John 3:23)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Impy

.
>> “Lot was an SOB to offer up his daughters to be gangraped by the whole town.” <<

.
Scripture?

.


12 posted on 01/14/2015 5:21:57 PM PST by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh
.
>> “Now that we are free from the law...” <<

.

1Corinthians 11:

[1] Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.
[2] Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.

.
Hummm - You must worship a different Yeshua than Paul did?

13 posted on 01/14/2015 5:30:13 PM PST by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

What?


14 posted on 01/14/2015 7:30:12 PM PST by Impy (They pull a knife, you pull a gun. That's the CHICAGO WAY, and that's how you beat the rats!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: NYer; metmom; boatbums; caww; presently no screen name; redleghunter; Springfield Reformer; ...
Liberal Christians are in a bind. How, after all, does one harmonize homosexuality with the Bible? Their solution, it appears, is to strip the Bible of its moral power, and run in rhetorical circles trying to escape its clear message.

That is indeed what they do,

While few pro homosexual writers concede that the Bible is contrary to same sex behavior, virtually all reject any Biblical censure of it. Author Robin Scroggs states, “Biblical judgments against homosexuality are not relevant to today’s debate.”(Robin Scroggs, The New Testament and Homosexuality (Philadelphia: Fortress, l983) p. 127.) William M. Kent, a member of the committee assigned by United Methodists to study homosexuality, explicitly denied the inspiration of any anti-homosex passages in the Bible, and their application today. John Boswell stated, regarding the Bible, that "one must first relinquish the concept of a single book containing a uniform corpus of writings accepted as morally authoritative." (John Boswell, Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1980), 92) John Barton states that the Bible is "a big baggy compendium of a book, full of variety and inconsistency, sometimes mistaken on matters of fact and theology alike." (John Barton, "The Place of the Bible in Moral Debate," Theology 88 (May 1985), 206) Gary David Comstock, Protestant chaplain at Wesleyan University, termed it "dangerous" to fail to condemn the apostle Paul's condemnation of homosexual relations, and advocated removing such from the canon. (Gary David Comstock, Gay Theology Without Apology (Cleveland, OH: Pilgrim Press, 1993), p. 43. http://www.albertmohler.com/article_read.php?cid7) Episcopalian professor L. William Countryman contends, “The gospel allows no rule against the following, in and of themselves: . .. bestiality, polygamy, homosexual acts,” or “pornography.” (Dirt, Greed, and Sex (Fortress, 1988) Christine E. Gudorf flatly denies that the Bible is the primary authority for Christian ethics. (Balch, Homosexuality, Science, and the "plain Sense" of Scripture p. 121) Bishop (Ret.) John Shelby Spong denies all miracles, including the virgin conception and literal bodily resurrection of Christ, as well as the Divine inspiration of Scripture, and denies that there are any moral absolutes (Michael Bott and Jonathan Sarfati, "What’s Wrong With (Former) Bishop Spong?") and relegates the clear condemnation of homosexual relations in Romans 1 to being the product of the apostle Paul's “ill-informed, culturally biased prejudices.” (Spong, Living in Sin? A Bishop Rethinks Human Sexuality, 149-52)

Meanwhile RCs turn Scripture into an abused servant compelled to support Rome, as many examples show.

15 posted on 01/14/2015 8:08:50 PM PST by daniel1212 (Come to the Lord Jesus as a contrite damned+destitute sinner, trust Him to save you, then live 4 Him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steve_Seattle
There’s a “gays for Jesus” guy on local public access television who claims that if you oppose homosexuality, you must embrace the Mosaic law in its entirety, or you’re a hypocrite.

Which argument is inane ignorance.

See HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONS and the BIBLE

16 posted on 01/14/2015 8:11:02 PM PST by daniel1212 (Come to the Lord Jesus as a contrite damned+destitute sinner, trust Him to save you, then live 4 Him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Impy
Lot was an SOB to offer up his daughters to be gangraped by the whole town.

While unthinkable to us, it could be that he know they only wanted the men, while in any case it nukes the liberal idea that the Sodomites only wanted to interrogate the strangers.

Lot was not a strong believer or defender of the faith, yet Lot also risked his own life by naively trying to reason with the Sodomites, and the angels would never have been inside Lot's house unless Lot insisted they stay with him, and also in contrast to many pastors today, all his daughters were married or virgins in a city given to fornication.

17 posted on 01/14/2015 8:25:46 PM PST by daniel1212 (Come to the Lord Jesus as a contrite damned+destitute sinner, trust Him to save you, then live 4 Him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
# 8 is what they say that we say about the subject at hand. So of course it's wrong and yes they do think we are stupid and evil and not Christian, which I think is Deal's point in writing this argument.

This is the line that the homosexual lobby is going for, because we say that sex outside of marriage is disordered. So they come back with gay marriage, thinking that will solve their problem. Which of course it will not because only a man and a woman can be married, I don't care how they twist it.

18 posted on 01/15/2015 5:29:03 AM PST by defconw (If not now, WHEN?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
Hummm - You must worship a different Yeshua than Paul did?

No, it's just that I'm not ignorant of New Testament commandments. 1 John 3:23.

19 posted on 01/15/2015 9:44:45 AM PST by aimhigh (1 John 3:23)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh
"It is dishonest. Now that we are free from the law, there is a New Testamant commandment against sexual immorality in 1 Thess 4:1-8."

The Mosaic law was never intended for all humanity, but only for the Jews, so Gentiles never needed to be declared "free of the law." But - as I understand it - some Jews speak of the "Noachide Laws," kind of a subset of the Mosaic law, which IS intended for all mankind, and the prohibition of homosexuality is included in that.
20 posted on 01/15/2015 10:04:03 AM PST by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson