The church's position on marriage?

[rosemary19]

By "church", I'm referring to the head office- 'the Vatican'. And yes, sacrament is what I meant.

 

The catholic church is a global religion but it isn't the head office of all the other religions,the head religion in this country is the church of England.

[some guy]

I know many Christians, including a few Catholics who have no problem whatsoever with homosexuality. I think the media tends to make Christianity look worse than it is. Some religions are much less tolerant to homosexuality... I think we all know to which I am referring.

[danot]

Which church are you referring to?

Where does the bible condemn homosexuality?

Should every word of the Bible be taken literally and followed to the letter?

I've snipped everything that I agree with so I can question the above section of your post. You ask- ["should every word of the Bible be taken literally and followed to the letter?"]

 

Well, in my opinion the Bible should be followed to the letter. Why would any true follower of it's teachings even want to question it or tweak it or feel the need to ignore specific parts of it? Who are they to question or criticise the Bible? Christianity isn't about opening the Bible and highlighting the bits you like and blotting out the bits you don't like is it? How can anyone who does this be considered a true follower? Surely ignoring one part of it would mean your not Completely committing to it?Would god really have sacrificed his only son to receive such a **** poor level of commitment from you?

[Longcol]

Just out of pure curiosity, I want to raise a point about the church's position on marriage.

 

Probably the missionary position

[danot]

Then let them do so but why does any other church that chooses not to marry gays have to have a gay agenda pushed on it?

 

True freedom and equality is allowing people to live in the beliefs and the ways they choose and not grinding down and browbeating everone to accept what a minority say is "good for everyone in the name of equality"

 

That kind of thinking only leads to resentment, the creation of prejudices that may not have been there before and the inevitable backlashes.

 

To each his own and leave it at that

 

If it's a case of "each to his own", why do religious folk protest when asked to remove or refrain from wearing items of religious significance in none religious places? Do religious folk feel that religious significance is of more importance than the significance of anything none religious or something?

[mikem8634]

Then let them do so but why does any other church that chooses not to marry gays have to have a gay agenda pushed on it?

 

They don't. In fact the Church of England and Church of Wales, as our established churches, will actually be banned in law from offering same-sex marriages. Other religious organisations will be able to "opt in" to holding ceremonies.

The details can be found here - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20680924 - do you still refuse to read links or have you gotten over that now?

 

True freedom and equality is allowing people to live in the beliefs and the ways they choose and not grinding down and browbeating everone to accept what a minority say is "good for everyone in the name of equality"

 

Sorry to disillusion you again but I doubt we are talking about a minority.

 

You are claiming an element of victimhood for either yourself or the Christian church by suggest grinding down and browbeating. The movement for equality is founded on a positive, inclusive desire for humanity to strive for civilisation. Now, re-examine your previous post -

The bible condemns homosexuality and the church follows the teachings of the bible.

Anyway of they started marrying gays or for that matter any Christian church started marrying gays they would lose about 98 percent of their congregations.

 

If gays have a problem with this then start a gay church or be content to be married in a registry office

It is laced with negativity, divisiveness and otherness. That sounds more like grinding down and browbeating to me

 

 

That kind of thinking only leads to resentment, the creation of prejudices that may not have been there before and the inevitable backlashes.

 

To each his own and leave it at that

 

That sounds very much like you are blaming homosexuals and those who support them for stoking the resentment and prejudice that exists against them by wanting equal rights to heterosexuals.

 

To each his own so long as homosexuals don't have equal rights? Or just stay out of the compassionate, caring, loving and open arms of your church?

 

Now, how about telling me if you believe whether or not every word of the bible should be followed to the letter? Have you looked at what is condemned in Leviticus? Do you abide strictly to it all?

 

My guess is you probably will not answer that. I hope you surprise me.

 

---------- Post added 17-02-2013 at 01:35 ----------

 

I've snipped everything that I agree with so I can question the above section of your post. You ask- ["should every word of the Bible be taken literally and followed to the letter?"]

 

Well, in my opinion the Bible should be followed to the letter. Why would any true follower of it's teachings even want to question it or tweak it or feel the need to ignore specific parts of it? Who are they to question or criticise the Bible? Christianity isn't about opening the Bible and highlighting the bits you like and blotting out the bits you don't like is it? How can anyone who does this be considered a true follower? Surely ignoring one part of it would mean your not Completely committing to it?Would god really have sacrificed his only son to receive such a **** poor level of commitment from you?

 

I am sure he is terribly disappointed in the level of commitment he gets from me as that level is zero.

 

The bible is full of bronze age thinking that our movement to civilisation has rendered anachronistic and obsolete. Progressive Christians understand that it was written through the prism of a much less sophisticated society than ours and, therefore, must be viewed and judged in this context. Then it can be philosophically edited and adapted to serve modern society in a sort of personal, individual version of the Council of Nicaea.

 

 

---------- Post added 17-02-2013 at 01:40 ----------

 

[/color]Seeing as I have asked posters to consider Leviticus here we are -

 

Here’s chapter and verse on a more-or-less comprehensive list of things banned in the Leviticus book of the bible. A decent number of them are punishable by death.

 

Unless you've never done any of them (and 54 to 56 are particularly tricky), perhaps it’s time to stop leaning on the good book?

 

1. Burning any yeast or honey in offerings to God (2:11)

 

2. Failing to include salt in offerings to God (2:13)

 

3. Eating fat (3:17)

 

4. Eating blood (3:17)

 

5. Failing to testify against any wrongdoing you’ve witnessed (5:1)

 

6. Failing to testify against any wrongdoing you’ve been told about (5:1)

 

7. Touching an unclean animal (5:2)

 

8. Carelessly making an oath (5:4)

 

9. Deceiving a neighbour about something trusted to them (6:2)

 

10. Finding lost property and lying about it (6:3)

 

11. Bringing unauthorised fire before God (10:1)

 

12. Letting your hair become unkempt (10:6)

 

13. Tearing your clothes (10:6)

 

14. Drinking alcohol in holy places (bit of a problem for Catholics, this ‘un) (10:9)

 

15. Eating an animal which doesn’t both chew cud and has a divided hoof (cf: camel, rabbit, pig) (11:4-7)

 

16. Touching the carcass of any of the above (problems here for rugby) (11:

 

17. Eating – or touching the carcass of – any seafood without fins or scales (11:10-12)

 

18. Eating – or touching the carcass of - eagle, the vulture, the black vulture, the red kite, any kind of black kite, any kind of raven, the horned owl, the screech owl, the gull, any kind of hawk, the little owl, the cormorant, the great owl, the white owl, the desert owl, the osprey, the stork, any kind of heron, the hoopoe and the bat. (11:13-19)

 

19. Eating – or touching the carcass of – flying insects with four legs, unless those legs are jointed (11:20-22)

 

20. Eating any animal which walks on all four and has paws (good news for cats) (11:27)

 

21. Eating – or touching the carcass of – the weasel, the rat, any kind of great lizard, the gecko, the monitor lizard, the wall lizard, the skink and the chameleon (11:29)

 

22. Eating – or touching the carcass of – any creature which crawls on many legs, or its belly (11:41-42)

 

23. Going to church within 33 days after giving birth to a boy (12:4)

 

24. Going to church within 66 days after giving birth to a girl (12:5)

 

25. Having sex with your mother (18:7)

 

26. Having sex with your father’s wife (18:

 

27. Having sex with your sister (18:9)

 

28. Having sex with your granddaughter (18:10)

 

29. Having sex with your half-sister (18:11)

 

30. Having sex with your biological aunt (18:12-13)

 

31. Having sex with your uncle’s wife (18:14)

 

32. Having sex with your daughter-in-law (18:15)

 

33. Having sex with your sister-in-law (18:16)

 

34. Having sex with a woman and also having sex with her daughter or granddaughter (bad news for Alan Clark) (18:17)

 

35. Marrying your wife’s sister while your wife still lives (18:1

 

36. Having sex with a woman during her period (18:19)

 

37. Having sex with your neighbour’s wife (18:20)

 

38. Giving your children to be sacrificed to Molek (18:21)

 

39. Having sex with a man “as one does with a woman” (18:22)

 

40. Having sex with an animal (18:23)

 

41. Making idols or “metal gods” (19:4)

 

42. Reaping to the very edges of a field (19:9)

 

43. Picking up grapes that have fallen in your vineyard (19:10)

 

44. Stealing (19:11)

 

45. Lying (19:11)

 

46. Swearing falsely on God’s name (19:12)

 

47. Defrauding your neighbour (19:13)

 

48. Holding back the wages of an employee overnight (not well observed these days) (19:13)

 

49. Cursing the deaf or abusing the blind (19:14)

 

50. Perverting justice, showing partiality to either the poor or the rich (19:15)

 

51. Spreading slander (19:16)

 

52. Doing anything to endanger a neighbour’s life (19:16)

 

53. Seeking revenge or bearing a grudge (19:1

 

54. Mixing fabrics in clothing (19:19)

 

55. Cross-breeding animals (19:19)

 

56. Planting different seeds in the same field (19:19)

 

57. Sleeping with another man’s slave (19:20)

 

58. Eating fruit from a tree within four years of planting it (19:23)

 

59. Practising divination or seeking omens (tut, tut astrology) (19:26)

 

60. Trimming your beard (19:27)

 

61. Cutting your hair at the sides (19:27)

 

62. Getting tattoos (19:2

 

63. Making your daughter prostitute herself (19:29)

 

64. Turning to mediums or spiritualists (19:31)

 

65. Not standing in the presence of the elderly (19:32)

 

66. Mistreating foreigners – “the foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born” (19:33-34)

 

67. Using dishonest weights and scales (19:35-36)

 

68. Cursing your father or mother (punishable by death) (20:9)

 

69. Marrying a prostitute, divorcee or widow if you are a priest (21:7,13)

 

70. Entering a place where there’s a dead body as a priest (21:11)

 

71. Slaughtering a cow/sheep and its young on the same day (22:2

 

72. Working on the Sabbath (23:3)

 

73. Blasphemy (punishable by stoning to death) (24:14)

 

74. Inflicting an injury; killing someone else’s animal; killing a person must be punished in kind (24:17-22)

 

75. Selling land permanently (25:23)

 

76. Selling an Israelite as a slave (foreigners are fine) (25:42)

 

https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourc...w=1280&bih=687

 

 

 

I hope that puts the scriptural line of oppression in context. Some are sensible, others are nonsense and utterly anachronistic in a modern and enlightened society.

[Vague_Boy]

By "church", I'm referring to the head office- 'the Vatican'. And yes, sacrament is what I meant.

 

Surely the phrase is "sanctity of marriage"?

[Halibut]

Well, in my opinion the Bible should be followed to the letter.

 

Are you a Christian? Or is this another example of you telling other people what to think and what to do?

 

Why would any true follower of it's teachings even want to question it or tweak it or feel the need to ignore specific parts of it?

 

Why not?

 

Who are they to question or criticise the Bible? Christianity isn't about opening the Bible and highlighting the bits you like and blotting out the bits you don't like is it?

 

How can you decide what 'being a Christian' is about? Are you one?

 

How can anyone who does this be considered a true follower? Surely ignoring one part of it would mean your not Completely committing to it?Would god really have sacrificed his only son to receive such a **** poor level of commitment from you?

 

Again, I think it's bizarre and slightly ridiculous that you're spouting about a faith you don't have and deciding how those that do express it.

You're like a teetotaller haranguing people about how they should drink.

 

---------- Post added 17-02-2013 at 06:56 ----------

 

It's a particular view from a particular group. Other religious groups have far more enlightened views.

 

Really?

Which ones?

 

If you look you'll find groups within most religions and churches that are welcoming of gay people.

[jfish1936]

Halibut answers the question:

Why would any true follower of it's teachings even want to question it or tweak it or feel the need to ignore specific parts of it?

 

Why not?

.

 

It's a matter of definition. If someone defines themselves as a "true follower of (the Bible's) teachings", then they have to follow it without deviation.

I am not a true follower of the Bible, so I can pull out bits that I like, and reject a lot of (say) Leviticus.

[MrSmith]

Which church are you referring to?

Where does the bible condemn homosexuality?

Should every word of the Bible be taken literally and followed to the letter?

 

 

 

In your opinion.

 

 

 

I am afraid it is not just a large proportion of gay people who have a problem with it Harley, it is everyone who cares about equality and living in a civilised society.

 

There is no need to start a gay church as some religious groups, including Quakers, Unitarians and Liberal Judaism, are in favour of same-sex marriage and will happily perform them.

Your statement is incorrect, only an all knowing God could know the opinions of everyone.

It may be your opinion along with many other people but it isn't the opinion of everyone who cares about equality and living in a civilised society.

 

---------- Post added 17-02-2013 at 07:46 ----------

 

Then let them do so but why does any other church that chooses not to marry gays have to have a gay agenda pushed on it?

 

True freedom and equality is allowing people to live in the beliefs and the ways they choose and not grinding down and browbeating everone to accept what a minority say is "good for everyone in the name of equality"

 

That kind of thinking only leads to resentment, the creation of prejudices that may not have been there before and the inevitable backlashes.

 

To each his own and leave it at that

 

Well said.