Pope Francis approves same sex unions - does he really approve homosexuality?

originally posted by: 2012newstart
The news broke yesterday that pope Francis endorsed the same sex civil unions while speaking in a documentary. However the questions are more than the answers. The practical introduction of gay civil unions to be LEGALLY ALLOWED by and inside the Catholic Church with priestly blessings on the ceremonies, is still far behind the horizon.

I'm not surprised at pope's decision and as for "homosexual civil union" or "marriage", the differences are irrelevant. This pope comes from the dark side.

The homosexual tendencies in the catholic church have been going on for too long unabated, especially in the recent times. It's a known thing that the catholic church had pagan roots and practiced such rituals, homosexuality and other forbidden acts were common and this pope just legitimizes this "tradition". I remember a book written by Malachi Martin called Windswept House, who served under a few different popes, where he talks about the moral degradation of this church.

I think that the Catholic Church and Vatican are morally corrupt entities which need to be exposed and rooted totally out from the face of this earth, together with other religions, Islam included, which do not honor the One true God of Israel and replaced with *one* religion based on God's laws given to Moses in the desert and that time is not far from now. The One true God never changes.

a reply to: andy06shake

Why would one require God's forgiveness?

Considering most of the transgressions we perpetrate are towards one another.

Should it not be the people we sin against or hurt whose absolution we seek?

That's a difficult question. A being needs God's forgiveness because of the eternal inextricable relationship God vs being and due to this relation when we sin, we cause a rupture in some different higher spiritual plane (no idea what plane) that needs to be rectified and it's God that makes sure that such transgressions in every possible plane, human or higher, are repaired.

Again I don't know all the nuts and bolts of such decisions, but it's a sure thing that when we are guilty of something, there's fractures beyond human scale that need to be taken care of.

And therein lies the problem because some things cannot, nor should not be forgiven, down to the nature of the incident or sin.

I'm told that *every* thing however bad it might be, should be forgiven by us humans. I know it's easier said than done. However, as mentioned, it's God that unfailingly takes care of the beings' transgressions in every way and plane imaginable. We as humans must forgive, otherwise we ourselves become guilty of not-forgiving, that's why God *absolutely* hates and punishes people that hold grudges, this I know for a fact. I'm aware it's a complicated subject.

The signs and revelations that 2020 has revealed show we are at an end of an age and a new one is growing, with old verboten ideas.....as were the days of Noah.



a reply to: 2012newstart

a reply to: miri2019

If God hates and punishes people for the sin of grudging, would that not in itself be a sin?

As to hate, if the big dude is benevolent as is suggested in the new testament, hate should not be in his rhetoric as he loves us unconditionally or so I'm lead to believe.

Id say joke or two, but it would be so offensive, an too easy, it would be like violating a child.

Which ironically Id be forgiven if i did, yet, they cruicfi for my internet history, which sadly again, the irony escapes them.

The church spent all these years demonizing gays to grow their base and now they have to undo it, gays are gods children.

Gays give consent, pedophiles rape.

a reply to: andy06shake

If God hates and punishes people for the sin of grudging, would that not in itself be a sin?

I get your point, but we're talking about the Supreme Being here, not humans/angels. One time I asked that exact question and the answer I got from the Divine was: "Miri, I'm not human"! Which means certain rules that apply to us, do not apply to God. I'm sure there's way more to that, but at this point that's how much I know.

As to hate, if the big dude is benevolent as is suggested in the new testament, hate should not be in his rhetoric as he loves us unconditionally or so I'm lead to believe.

The key word here is "so I'm lead to believe", reality is different from what we consider it to be. Just for the record God is slow in anger, and yes, He's kind and wonderful, but his punishment is stuff of nightmares, horrific!!

P.S. I consider the so-called "New Testament" simply the work of fiction, together with its main character, far away from the complex and all-inclusive (beyond good and evil) nature of God.

P.P.S. Just a brotherly suggestion. I think I've mentioned to you before - I'd steer clear of using such disrespectful terms for the Divine, like "big dude" and others. Words cut like a knife and God is very sensitive towards such language, *very sensitive* !! He'll definitely let you know about it in due time, I speak from personal experience.

a reply to: miri2019

See i have an issue with anything divine that creates us in his own image and then imagines he can judge us by anything other than his own standards.

Can't have one rule for some and another for the rest.

Not even in heaven.

That way anarchy prevails.

I suppose there was that one war all the same, but we are not really told much about the whole affair other than a third of God's angels did not fair to well out the whole shebang.

We are only just beginning to understand what constitutes reality.

But at the end of the day reality is about perspective which is a very personal experience.

As to the New Testament simply being a work of fiction, well its a work of Man just like the first volume, there is no dought about that im afraid.

Pal if God is sensitive towards such language, he should not have built me to ask questions nor wield such terminology in the first place.

Nevermind the massive inferiority complex that would display.

No harm intended to the big dude but i our interpretation nevermind anthropomorphizations of him leaves a lot to be desired, like proof for instance.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Doctor Smith

I've always wondered about the absolution of sins part.

Why would one require God's forgiveness?

Considering most of the transgressions we perpetrate are towards one another.

Should it not be the people we sin against or hurt whose absolution we seek?

And therein lies the problem because some things cannot, nor should not be forgiven, down to the nature of the incident or sin.

Im christened a protestant myself Doctor Smith but somehow i imagine some of the things i have done in this world cannot simply be washed away just down to me being sorry or it being in the past, even in as much as i would like that to be the case.

Seem to me we make our beds, we should at least have the stomach to lie in them as we are responsible for our own actions in this verse as soon as we understand the difference between right and wrong.

If I remember correctly. God (Father) sent Jesus (Son) to our realm to live a life without sin. In order to pay the price of his followers sins. He was sacrificed and became the (Holy Ghost). We aren't capable of living free of sin. So we have to have Communion to have our sins forgiven.

If you die early before you ever had communion wouldn't you then go to hell as none of your sins have been erased? And is God capable of creating a stone heavier than what he (an all powerful God) can lift?

a reply to: Doctor Smith

Having never died myself(touch wood) nor ken anyone who's came back to tell the tale i really could not speculate as to where those who die early or have not received communion go, same place as the rest of us would be my guess.

As to heavy rocks, do you mean the 3rd rock from the Sun?

Think that's Atlas department but he's a Titan, not sure if that's the same as a God all the same.

And for the record I don't approve of Homosexual marriage. It goes against the Bible. Marriage is a contract between a male and female in order to have children. Sex is a biological urge to produce children. If you have an attraction to your own sex you have some type of physical or mental disorder.

If you want to deviate from the Churches teachings you shouldn't be forcing the Church to sanction it.

a reply to: Doctor Smith

It's not my cup a tea myself but that's rather a draconian outlook to have in this day of age.

For the record, i really could not care where someone sticks their tallywhacker as long as they are consenting adults and its nowhere near my arse. LoL

Takes all sorts to make the world spin Doctor Smith and people cannot help who they are attracted to as it's apparently not a choice.

Surely any benevolent god would realize that fact?

Anyhoo what's Churchs got to do with sexuality in the first place?

I don't remember shafting coming up much if im honest.

a reply to: andy06shake

I know homosexuals and they aren't straight shooters. They want to have legal marriage so they can have the tax benefits. And some of them are gold diggers. Enter gay divorce.

The government can choose to approve gay marriage. The Church shouldn't have to.

Marriage was around long before the church came along and copied and demonized that which came before it, they shouldn’t have been deciding who can marry in the first place, or burn people at the stake, or start wars, abuse children and enrich themselves.

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
And for the record I don't approve of Homosexual marriage. It goes against the Bible. Marriage is a contract between a male and female in order to have children. Sex is a biological urge to produce children. If you have an attraction to your own sex you have some type of physical or mental disorder.

If you want to deviate from the Churches teachings you shouldn't be forcing the Church to sanction it.

do you wear mixed fabrics, work on a sunday, eat pork, have sex which is non procreational?

there are a lot of rules in the bible, some that make no sense in this day and age, but it seems cherry pickingt eh ones that suit seems to be always in vogue with bible readers

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
a reply to: andy06shake

I know homosexuals and they aren't straight shooters. They want to have legal marriage so they can have the tax benefits. And some of them are gold diggers. Enter gay divorce.

The government can choose to approve gay marriage. The Church shouldn't have to.

and? why should us hetros get all the tax breaks?

a reply to: Doctor Smith

My brother in law and his partner are gay and the wee guy was great a football growing up.

They're married and stay in Coatbridge don't think there's much gold to be had round those parts all the same.

The government nor the church has anything to do with sexual preference nor who you should be allowed to marry Doctor Smith, sounds like communism really. LoL

a reply to: andy06shake

The problem with that approach is that you're lowering the Divine down to the human level and then applying human standards to that approach, that simply is not possible.

If you want to know about the wars in heavenly places you just search for other sources. Bible is not such a source and bringing that up as a basis for a conversation is dealing in false premises.

I don't subscribe to moral relativism, so for me reality is a solid separate entity independent from me.

The Old Testament is the work of Man, I agree, but at the same time certain parts of it are real events documented by people. Just look at the words of the prophets of old that forewarned the jewish people against betraying God, cause He'd punish them and the history showed that same thing happening.

When God created the beings, He made them totally free willed and they could question any thing. What those beings did wrong, was the disrespectful way they went to do those questions. Bad behaviour has bad consequences in high (and low) places.

God is more than His human-like (anthropomorphized) form, that's one of His many forms. To learn that and more, one needs to advance up the spiritual scale. No proof can be offered in the sense that you're asking for them, learning about God is a personal experience and very humble at that. I remember your irritation with the anthropomorphized form of God, some things are the way they are, as to why, that takes time to be learned.

a reply to: miri2019

And the problem with your approach is you just like everyone else on Earth, you don't have a real clue as to god's attributes or unequivocal existence for that matter.

Whatever God is, if God is, it's probably so far beyond the scope of our understanding as to make any interpretations meaningless.

a reply to: andy06shake

That's applying your misconception about God to everybody else, as if no single soul knows nothing about Him.

The being's approach to understand God is gradual one, you learn a bit here and a bit there and slowly a more complete picture starts to form. It's not from zero knowledge about the Divine to total absolute understanding of Him, it simply doesn't work like that.