homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   »   » Oblivion   » What homos do in bed (Page 4)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: What homos do in bed
Rosa Winkel

Saint Anger round my neck
# 11424

 - Posted      Profile for Rosa Winkel   Author's homepage   Email Rosa Winkel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
and he scores a hat-trick!

--------------------
The Disability and Jesus "Locked out for Lent" project

Posts: 3271 | From: Wrocław | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643

 - Posted      Profile for dj_ordinaire   Author's homepage   Email dj_ordinaire   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by andreas1984:


A quick google search gave this:

quote:
Weakness for wealth and for collecting and owning things of different kinds; the urge for physical (sensuous) enjoyment; the longing for honor, which is the root of envy; the desire to conquer and be the deciding factor; pride in the glory of power; the urge to adorn oneself and to be liked; the craving for praise; concern and anxiety for physical well-being. All these are of the world; they combine deceitfully to hold us in heavy bonds.
All these things are aspects of our brokenness, which is the world to which we must die so that we can live in Christ. They are passions that need to get healed before we enter the Kingdom. And if we say we have entered the Kingdom but our passions follow, we will be like the man who came to the Wedding but did not wear appropriate clothing and was thrown out by the angry Host.
Okay, I think I follow now.

My question is still - why do you think that homosexuality is a Passion? It doesn't sound much like the urge for conquering and envy to me... Why do you think then that it's a Passion? Not why the Saints thought it, but why you think it?

--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...

Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
El Greco
Shipmate
# 9313

 - Posted      Profile for El Greco   Email El Greco   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I don't think I can explain out why a passion is a passion... I mean, I can see that I have to deal with many passions, but I am not sure I can have an intellectual approach, that I can give a rational explanation as to why passions are passions...

Take love for glory for example. Is it a passion to want to be a great King or a great prime minister and shape the fate of the planet so that peace and economical growth and democracy get spread, and I get glorified by the people as the best leader they ever had? Yes it is, but at first glance it doesn't look like that damaging a wish to have!

From what I can see in my own personal life, passions keep us bound to the earth, and do not allow us to be in unhindered communion with God. And since the work of an Orthodox is to come into that conscious and unhindered communion, passions need to get dealt with. With the passion man returns to himself instead of turning to God, so they need to get dealt with.

None of this, of course, gives a direct answer to your question, but, like I said, I cannot give the rationale behind passions. After all, when you are fighting you don't get the luxury of pausing to make an intellectual analysis of what's going on!

Christianity in general has been anti-pleasure. Because pleasures return back to ourselves they are seen, I think, as disastrous to one's way towards God.

This was the case for sexual pleasure. I want sexual pleasure and I can find that in many women, men, through masturbation, whatever. But in getting satisfaction that way, I have re-ordered myself so that I re-trun to myself and not turn towards God. Hence I remain unsaved.

Why is it a mistake for someone wanting to come into conscious union with God to have causal consensual sex? What harm is it if I have many girlfriends over my lifetime? Or a couple of them even?

I don't know. Perhaps it's the pain that comes when a relationship ends. Or the alienation that leads to an end. Or the immaturity and superficiality that leads to alienation in the first place.

Is the Church's theology on sex outdated? Well, if you remove from your scope the very reachable goal of conscious and unhindered communion with God while in this life, then yes it's outdated and alien. but if you have that communion in mind, I don't know if it still can be seen as that alien to real life...

I still haven't answered your question, I know. I don't have an explanation that appeals to the intellect. I can only make scenarios. What if someone very early in his life has a passion changing his heart so that he wants members of the same sex. And let's say that that someone makes a huge effort to be a Christian and follow Christ, and has managed not to succumb to lust, but still wants to have a meaningful relationship with another member of his sex? Well, it could be that relationships like that cannot be truly meaningful, but they can appear as meaningful when they really aren't. Or that they can be meaningful but still the passion works unnoticed and does not allow for the so much wanted communion with God. If the Church was to bless the passion, then communion would be impossible, because the way that leads there would be officially closed and lost.

Of course that's no answer. I don't know. But I do know that changing the ancient Paradosis (Tradition = what has been given once and for all) can be very very dangerous.

Not that any of this matters for the majority of the people... I don't think the vast majority even thinks of coming into full unhindered and conscious communion with God while at this life... But there are some that are interested in that, and for these people the Road our fathers walked must not get closed forever.

Sorry for a deeply unsatisfactory post.

--------------------
Ξέρω εγώ κάτι που μπορούσε, Καίσαρ, να σας σώσει.

Posts: 11285 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
John Holding

Coffee and Cognac
# 158

 - Posted      Profile for John Holding   Email John Holding   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
So we are left, not for the first time, with a word that means something to Andreas but something else to everyone else who speaks English. It seems to me that it is up to Andreas, if he wants us to understand what he is saying, to find a word in english that means what he is trying to say.

"Passion" is an English word, not a greek one. I don't know what the greek word is that Andreas is using "passion" to translate. If "passion" doesn't mean what the greek word means" -- and clearly it does not, or we wouldn't be having this problem -- then Andreas has to find another word or phrase to communicate whatever he (and the greek word in question) is trying to say.

Otherwise there can be no discussion, and Andreas' position will be an irrelevence to the debate.

We are not in Wonderland after all, and none of us is the (white? Red?) Queen who famously said that words mean just what she means by them.

John
John

Posts: 5929 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643

 - Posted      Profile for dj_ordinaire   Author's homepage   Email dj_ordinaire   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by John Holding:
We are not in Wonderland after all, and none of us is the (white? Red?) Queen who famously said that words mean just what she means by them.

Humpty Dumpty, I think you'll find!

I know what you mean with the rest of the post, but I don't actually think the problem is that great - andreas seems to be using the word 'Passion' in more-or-less the same way I would use 'sin' (or more accurately, 'a tendency towards sin and away from God').

I still don't think that this applies to homosexuality in any way that it doesn't apply to heterosexuality also, but I guess that's why it's a Dead Horse...

--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...

Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
El Greco
Shipmate
# 9313

 - Posted      Profile for El Greco   Email El Greco   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Of course. It's just me. If you google for passions you will find only John's meaning of the word... Right!

This is circular. A deeply anti-ascetical culture comes and shapes language the way it wants, then you complain for me using the term.

My guess is that the lack of a word (or a meaning for a word) so crucial for the ancient Christian view of the world shows an inadequate Christian culture that has been shaping language for centuries.

I have heard people speak of sins (acts of sin) and temptation, but I haven't seen people around here speak of our own passions that afflict us. Perhaps that's because your worldview does not make room for these things, which would explain the lack of a word for it.

I used the term passion because it comes from the Greek pathos, which has many meanings, among others it means something I suffer. For example, we speak of Christ's Passion, because He suffered the violence of the Crucifixion. This word has a deep meaning in ancient Christian ethics...

I don't like what you said John. It's as if you would complain for my use of the term "world" to refer to the world of passions, just because the average English speaker thinks of cosmos when he hears the word "world". Words can have more than one meanings, and Christianity has enriched language giving deep meanings to ordinary words. Our undoing that now is a sad thing.

ETA: Cross-posted with dj

[ 27. February 2008, 14:13: Message edited by: andreas1984 ]

--------------------
Ξέρω εγώ κάτι που μπορούσε, Καίσαρ, να σας σώσει.

Posts: 11285 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
El Greco
Shipmate
# 9313

 - Posted      Profile for El Greco   Email El Greco   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Basically, I'm sick of this whole situation. When your own bibles include the word passion the way I used it, I find it very hostile of you to attack me for bringing the word in our discussion. I'm really sick and tired of all this. It is very obvious that you have chosen your own way, and it has been a matter of centuries you following your way. Want unilateral changes? Fine. Do whatever you want. I just get sad to see the name of Christianity being a mere name for all sort of strange teachings that have little to do with the historical Christianity founded on Christ.
A Christianity that does not save is no Christianity at all.

End of my rant.

Have fun [Razz]

Posts: 11285 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
beachpsalms
Shipmate
# 4979

 - Posted      Profile for beachpsalms   Email beachpsalms   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
But Andreas.. the church in all her glorious messiness is not, and has not for a long, long time been comprised of those who put tradition before all else. We have the sola scriptura folks, too. (And on the What is Methodism thread a few days ago, someone opined that we seem to take experience quite seriously as well.)

Even so... I can see the argument that attaching ourselves to pleasure can turn us away from God (even though I disagree, not being very ascetically minded) - but I still do not see how that leads to the singling out of sexual orientation as a beyond the pale passion that can not be tolerated.

I'm inordinately fond of a nice sock wool, after all... something with a bit of colour and a nice stretch against my rosewood needles. I've been known to pay more attention to my stitch count than my church meetings. And yet, the Knitting and All Things Crafty thread is not a Dead Horse debating the sinful ways of our passion for textiles.

--------------------
"You willing to die for that belief?"
"I am. 'Course, that ain't exactly Plan A."

Posts: 826 | From: a hamster's cheek-pouch full of raisins | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged
Josephine

Orthodox Belle
# 3899

 - Posted      Profile for Josephine   Author's homepage   Email Josephine   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by andreas1984:
Of course. It's just me. If you google for passions you will find only John's meaning of the word... Right!

This is circular. A deeply anti-ascetical culture comes and shapes language the way it wants, then you complain for me using the term.

Andreas, the thing is, if you want to communicate with people who live in a different culture and who speak a different language, you have to figure out how to put the ideas you have into words in their language, words that make sense in their culture. Berating them for not having the words isn't helpful.

When you use a word that means something else to most English speakers, and something different to you, you're going to confuse people and end up failing to communicate. You can use the failure to "prove" the superiority of your language and culture, or you can take a deep breath, humble yourself a bit, and explain what you mean. Sometimes it's easier, even, if you use a word that doesn't even exist in English. Many people on the ship, for example, understand the word podvig[, because they know they don't know it, and some of us other Orthodox types have had many opportunities to explain it, and it works. But saying, "There's no English word for this, and it's a really important Christian concept, so English speakers are barely even Christian" -- that doesn't work.

Instead of using the word passion, you might try using pathos -- and italicizing it when you use it, which is the customary way to emphasize that a word is not an English word -- and then explaining a few times what you mean by it. People aren't trying not to understand you. They're trying hard to engage. But you're going to have to adjust your language, if you want to communicate.

If you said, "Pathos refers to those desires that are rooted in our tendency to sin, it means the things that we want that we wish we didn't want, or that we can't help wanting, whether it's good for us or not, and it refers to the suffering and pain that this tendency inflicts on us, and to the damage it causes to all our relationships, and most especially the damage it causes to our relationship with God" or something like that, and maybe refer to St. Paul's comments, where he talks about not doing those things he wants to do, and doing the things he hates -- people understand that, Andreas, even if they don't use the word passion for it.

And you could give examples to help people understand the difference between an innocent and God-given appetite (hunger) and a passion that causes one to be tempted and perhaps to sin (the desire to eat for reasons that have nothing to do with hunger). Eating in any case is pleasurable, but the pleasure is a good and healthy consequence of the former, but something that tempts us to gluttony in the latter. And it can be very, very hard for us to know which is which.

All this is, as you say, important to the Christian life, and essential to our salvation. But using a particular word for it isn't important at all.

--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!

Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
St. Sarcastica
Apprentice
# 13405

 - Posted      Profile for St. Sarcastica   Email St. Sarcastica   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by andreas1984:
quote:
Originally posted by St. Sarcastica:
[qb]Well, that`s because no one arguing in favor of same-sex couples would be labeled a "Saint" by the people who give those labels.

The people who give those labels are the laypeople who get to live with a person and can testify of his holiness. Many many Saints have been persecuted by the officials of the Church. Many of them have been tortured by the decent society and exiled and died in prison. Some of them had their hands and tongues cut.

Like I said, they were pariahs, not exactly power's best friends...

And when God reveals a man or a woman of that magnitude, the people run to him or her for advice, for healing, for help. And it is because the people got immense help that they are now celebrated as Saints...

Take the late elder Paisios for example. Countless people have been healed of their diseases through his prayers. He was knowing who came to visit him before they came. Read a bit of his life, and you will realize that a Saint is someone that extra-ordinary. If he was to say "look, you have got it wrong, same-sex couples can be blessed" then that would be quite a thing.

And neither did the great Saints of old say such a thing...

You are running in a circle.

quote:
What bothers me, and that's a question to MouseThief as well, is that if we are born heterosexuals and some people are born homosexuals, then why wasn't the issue addressed and resolved in the ancient times?
Because they didn`t have the knowledge about nature of sexual orientation. They didn`t now a lot of things we know. They didn`t know that Earth is round and not flat. It`s that simple.
Posts: 14 | From: Europe | Registered: Feb 2008  |  IP: Logged
Otter
Shipmate
# 12020

 - Posted      Profile for Otter   Author's homepage   Email Otter   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by MouseThief:
"Passions" is a technical term in Orthodoxy. I have never quite been able to totally pin down the meaning -- sometimes it seems to mean "temptation" and other times something like "actions arising from the old man or sinful nature". They can be opposed (this is a form of "spiritual warfare" IIRC) or given in to. We are told to flee from all passions. Jesus' death is paradoxically referred to as the "passionless passion" playing on the two meanings of the word (apparently, even in Greek).

Ok, I suspected that Andreas was using it in a more restrictive way than the general dictionary definition. Thank you for the explanation. It helps the discussion make more sense. Andreas' statement that lust is an Passion in the Orthodox sense, while love is not necessarily is a chain I can follow now. I don't follow how homosexual love is (always) a Passion while heterosexul love isn't, but that's why this discussion is in Dead Horses.

quote:
Originally posted by MouseThief:
What is unclear is whether the type of stable homosexual relationship between two committed and loving partners is a passion [o.s.].

Yep, it is the big question. My personal (and Orthodox-clueless [Smile] ) opinion is that it is not, any more than it would be if you substituted in the word "heterosexual" above. Some homesexual relationships probably are, and so are some heterosexuals. Some people can have a glass of wine and enjoy it without a problem, some people are alcoholics.

It's the automatic assumption that all homosexuals relationships are shallow and tawdry, and thus sinful, that gets my knickers in a twist. But that was probably obvious from what I've already said...

--------------------
The plural of "anecdote" is not "data", YMMV, limited-time offer, IANAL, no purchase required, and the state of CA has found this substance to cause cancer in laboratory aminals

Posts: 1429 | From: Chicago, IL 'burbs | Registered: Nov 2006  |  IP: Logged
El Greco
Shipmate
# 9313

 - Posted      Profile for El Greco   Email El Greco   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
Andreas, the thing is, if you want to communicate with people who live in a different culture and who speak a different language, you have to figure out how to put the ideas you have into words in their language, words that make sense in their culture.

Josephine, I assure you I wouldn't make a big deal out of it had I not been hurt by John's post.

I threw the word passions in the biblegateway, and tried the NIV and the ESV. Both bibles make use of the word. It's not something I made up and I feel hurt, OK?

Your own bibles use the word, but I get a lecture for using it and I am being portrayed in less than charitable ways.

Try that out!

ESV
NIV

[ 27. February 2008, 14:53: Message edited by: andreas1984 ]

Posts: 11285 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Josephine

Orthodox Belle
# 3899

 - Posted      Profile for Josephine   Author's homepage   Email Josephine   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think that feelings were hurt on both sides, Andreas. You sometimes come across as harsh and judgmental, as if you are already a saint in every sense of the word just because you're Orthodox. I know you don't mean that, but it sometimes sounds that way.

And you naturally get frustrated when people don't understand what you mean, and they get frustrated when you don't understand what they mean. Cross-cultural communication just has so many openings for misunderstandings.

And, as you well know, the frustration and hurt feelings you're dealing with are evidence of your own passions. Great Lent is coming.

I hope your "Thursday of roast meat" is a joy, by the way.

--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!

Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
El Greco
Shipmate
# 9313

 - Posted      Profile for El Greco   Email El Greco   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I don't want John to feel guilty or anything. I'm OK now, and I hope he forgives my sharp reply.

Our language can be enriched by adding meanings to the words, or shaping the meanings words already have. There is no reason to think the Dictionary fell from Heaven, like Quran!

quote:
Originally posted by Otter:
I don't follow how homosexual love is (always) a Passion while heterosexul love isn't, but that's why this discussion is in Dead Horses.

There are degrees of love. Friendship is a form of love, companionship is a form of love, caring for one's compatriots is a form of love. These are lower forms of love, and as we move towards higher forms of love we find God being Love.

Love is a big issue in itself, and I feel so small compared to the depth of this issue, so I will leave that aside. For examples, there are questions for what constitutes selfless love and what is selfish love. Selfishness keeps us bound to the flesh, selflessness sets us free. Then there is the issue of a kind of love co-existing with passions.

Then there is pleasure, and why Christianity has been so much anti-pleasure. I think that this is a bigger issue that needs to be explored first before we could understand the specific issues that arise better...

Posts: 11285 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Comper's Child
Shipmate
# 10580

 - Posted      Profile for Comper's Child     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by andreas1984:
Our language can be enriched by adding meanings to the words, or shaping the meanings words already have. There is no reason to think the Dictionary fell from Heaven, like Quran!

quote:
Originally posted by Otter:
I don't follow how homosexual love is (always) a Passion while heterosexul love isn't, but that's why this discussion is in Dead Horses.

There are degrees of love. Friendship is a form of love, companionship is a form of love, caring for one's compatriots is a form of love. These are lower forms of love, and as we move towards higher forms of love we find God being Love.

Love is a big issue in itself, and I feel so small compared to the depth of this issue, so I will leave that aside. For examples, there are questions for what constitutes selfless love and what is selfish love. Selfishness keeps us bound to the flesh, selflessness sets us free. Then there is the issue of a kind of love co-existing with passions.

Then there is pleasure, and why Christianity has been so much anti-pleasure. I think that this is a bigger issue that needs to be explored first before we could understand the specific issues that arise better...

Yeah, but I don't get how friendship, caring for others etc are lower forms of love. Love is love. Love comes from God. Do we have other issues which cause us to sin? Sure, are we perfect - no far from it - do we love in every way as God loves? No - but lower forms? No I don't buy it. Jesus, after all calls his disciples friends, or was he just expressing some lower form?
Posts: 2509 | From: Penn's Greene Countrie Towne | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460

 - Posted      Profile for ken     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by andreas1984:
Then there is pleasure, and why Christianity has been so much anti-pleasure.

That's a historical perversion of Christianity, a Gnostic/Manichee infection, from which the CHurch on earth needs to be purged.

The Saints who were anti-pleasure were wrong. They confused salvation with a mere abscence of passion (in your sense) (Which is a perfectly normal sense in English and I don't know why so many people are making a fuss about it)

But its the old anti-Crhistian idea that the created world is evil. We should be done with it.

quote:
Originally posted by St. Sarcastica:
Because they didn`t have the knowledge about nature of sexual orientation. They didn`t now a lot of things we know. They didn`t know that Earth is round and not flat. It`s that simple.

Er, but actually they did know the Earth is round and not flat.

And frankly, we nowadays have very little scientific knowledge about the "nature of sexual orientation". Not real science. We don't have much idea at all of why some people fancy some peopel and others others. We have more or less know knowledge whatsoever of the genetic basis of sexual desire or preference.

I'm pretty sure that in a few decades time the notion that the word "homosexuality" or indeed "sexuality" refers to any biological thing in the real world will have gone the way of phlogiston and the philosopher's stone and 6-day creationsism or the notion of well-defined biological races in the human species. Its a bit of pseudoscience.

--------------------
Ken

L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.

Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Otter
Shipmate
# 12020

 - Posted      Profile for Otter   Author's homepage   Email Otter   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by andreas1984:
quote:
Originally posted by Otter:
I don't follow how homosexual love is (always) a Passion while heterosexul love isn't, but that's why this discussion is in Dead Horses.

There are degrees of love. Friendship is a form of love, companionship is a form of love, caring for one's compatriots is a form of love. These are lower forms of love, and as we move towards higher forms of love we find God being Love.

Love is a big issue in itself, and I feel so small compared to the depth of this issue, so I will leave that aside. For examples, there are questions for what constitutes selfless love and what is selfish love. Selfishness keeps us bound to the flesh, selflessness sets us free. Then there is the issue of a kind of love co-existing with passions.

This answer . . . isn't one, at least to me. It's not addressing the question of why heterosexual love is good, or at least ok, and homosexual love isn't. You imply that homosexual love is a lesser love, or a more selfish love, but not the why. Is it an explanation you have difficulty putting into words, or is it more of an "XYZ says so"? I'm not trying to attack you or your position, but trying to understand where you're coming from.

--------------------
The plural of "anecdote" is not "data", YMMV, limited-time offer, IANAL, no purchase required, and the state of CA has found this substance to cause cancer in laboratory aminals

Posts: 1429 | From: Chicago, IL 'burbs | Registered: Nov 2006  |  IP: Logged
El Greco
Shipmate
# 9313

 - Posted      Profile for El Greco   Email El Greco   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Comper's Child

It's a low form of love, in the sense that having peace among countries is a low form of peace (My peace I give unto you, not like the world...)

One can only have a look at what the lovers of God said of their experience with Him... God is love and we can partake in that love. But if we can partake in that love, then we can experience the love God has for the entire creation for ourselves... We can reach that height and love as God loves. Which is the whole point behind my rant here and there on the Ship, my sigh, if you want. Christianity exists so that man can become God and not even being aware of that is a very sad thing because we get shut off from a potential that is quite amazing!

[ 27. February 2008, 16:01: Message edited by: andreas1984 ]

Posts: 11285 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643

 - Posted      Profile for dj_ordinaire   Author's homepage   Email dj_ordinaire   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by andreas1984:
Christianity exists so that man can become God and not even being aware of that is a very sad thing because we get shut off from a potential that is quite amazing!

But we know that! Even in the poor benighted West, we're perfectly well aware of this fact. It's just that we don't think you're going after it in the right way by seeking to eliminate all 'worldliness' or pleasure from your life.

(Or at any rate this may work for some people, but is by no means the only route).

None of which really has any bearing on whether homosexuality represents a distancing of oneself from God in any that heterosexuality also doesn't. The fact that ostensibly Holy people say it is really isn't enough, not least because I could drag out plenty of ostensibly Holy people who would disagree with them.

--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...

Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
El Greco
Shipmate
# 9313

 - Posted      Profile for El Greco   Email El Greco   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
That's a historical perversion of Christianity, a Gnostic/Manichee infection, from which the CHurch on earth needs to be purged.

Get prepared to purge your bibles then [Razz]

Even the New Testament has something to say about pleasures. And I'm saying "even", because it is supposed to be Kerygmatic in nature.

Always keep in mind the epistle to Diognetus. The world hates the Christians because the Christians hate pleasures.

It's not an issue of material creation being bad. It's an issue of pleasures preventing us from ascending to God.

quote:
The Saints who were anti-pleasure were wrong. They confused salvation with a mere abscence of passion (in your sense)
Not at all. They spoke about it as the beginning of our ascension, not as the end. Dealing with passions was a prerequisite for ascending into the level of theoreia (beholding), it was not theoreia itself.

Plus, they did not struggle to stop having passions, but to transform passions. Everything that is of the body or the soul, says St. Gregory Palamas for example, is very good, and created by God! None of the powers of the body and the soul is to be lost. Nothing is to be cast away.

quote:
Which is a perfectly normal sense in English and I don't know why so many people are making a fuss about it
You knew that the phrase "we believe in one God" of the credo refers to God the Father. You don't count [Razz]

quote:
And frankly, we nowadays have very little scientific knowledge about the "nature of sexual orientation". [/QB]
Exactly! Which is why I don't like the arguments here that begin with "but science says" [Paranoid]

quote:
Originally posted by Otter:
Is it an explanation you have difficulty putting into words, or is it more of an "XYZ says so"? I'm not trying to attack you or your position, but trying to understand where you're coming from.

It's a difficulty to put in words what the eye of the heart can sense. Imagine having the trinitarian debate without all those ancient refined words. It would be a very difficult thing.
Of course, throwing nowadays all those ancient words won't make a discussion between average people much easier!

quote:
Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:
None of which really has any bearing on whether homosexuality represents a distancing of oneself from God in any that heterosexuality also doesn't.

True, it hasn't. Yet saying that our nature is for a man and a woman to get together and join their lives and have sex and children and when someone has that natural tendency distorted inside himself and he gets to have feelings towards members of the same sex, is not acceptable by you guys either because it cannot be "proved"... It's a circle...

quote:
The fact that ostensibly Holy people say it is really isn't enough, not least because I could drag out plenty of ostensibly Holy people who would disagree with them.
It depends what you mean by holy. I think Plotinus and Buddha were holy in their own ways, but I would not dream of introducing their teachings in Christianity! Any Saint of the undivided church of the first millennium? No? Why not?

--------------------
Ξέρω εγώ κάτι που μπορούσε, Καίσαρ, να σας σώσει.

Posts: 11285 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349

 - Posted      Profile for Anglican_Brat   Email Anglican_Brat   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I want to follow up on my previous post.

So when it comes to relationships, any relationship characterized by caritas, that is mutuality, compassion, love and commitment, can be sacramental, a vehicle for human beings to commune with God.

I don't believe God cares if the parties involved have a penis or a vagina. I'm reminded of John the Baptist's teaching that God can raise up sons of Abraham from stone. If God could have made everyone heterosexual, he could have done it, easily.

So yes, there are same-sex relationships that are sacramental. There are heterosexual relationships that are sacramental. There are same-sex relationships and heterosexual relationships that are sinful. What matters is the character of the relationship, not the plumbing of the parties involved.

In that way, we preserve the best of Christian tradition. The Scriptures and the Fathers all teach that compassion and love are at the heart of Christian faith. The love revealed in the embodiment of God, Jesus Christ, towards all people. Any relationship that reflects that love is holy and sacramental. And when the Church refuses to recognize that, I would be bold to say that it refuses to recognize the will of God working in our lives.

--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.

Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
El Greco
Shipmate
# 9313

 - Posted      Profile for El Greco   Email El Greco   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by bc_anglican:
And when the Church refuses to recognize that, I would be bold to say that it refuses to recognize the will of God working in our lives.

Of course it does, if what you are saying is true! Which is why this is a big issue for me, even though I am not personally influenced by the debate!

Saying that people are born (I think that's what you mean by God making all heterosexual) homosexual however is circular. How do you know?

Take Dawkins for example. In his Extended Phenotype he mentions a scenario of his. There is some genetic basis, he says, but the phenotype for that genotype is far from a clear issue. The phenotype is influenced by environment, so a genotype that had phenotype A in the deep past, it might have been having phenotype B in the past 10.000 years and we might be seeing that phenotype and assume that the genotype is supposed to give that phenotype in the first place when it's not!

Nobody demonizes love. Friendship is very important, and the love between friends is amazing. Which is why John can be the beloved disciple of Jesus without this implying a sexual tension between the two!

[ 27. February 2008, 16:41: Message edited by: andreas1984 ]

Posts: 11285 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
St. Sarcastica
Apprentice
# 13405

 - Posted      Profile for St. Sarcastica   Email St. Sarcastica   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by St. Sarcastica:
[qb]Because they didn`t have the knowledge about nature of sexual orientation. They didn`t now a lot of things we know. They didn`t know that Earth is round and not flat. It`s that simple.

Er, but actually they did know the Earth is round and not flat.
Who did? And did they know the speed of light etc.?

quote:
And frankly, we nowadays have very little scientific knowledge about the "nature of sexual orientation". Not real science.
Uh...
Posts: 14 | From: Europe | Registered: Feb 2008  |  IP: Logged
El Greco
Shipmate
# 9313

 - Posted      Profile for El Greco   Email El Greco   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by St. Sarcastica:
Who did? And did they know the speed of light etc.?

Well, Aristarchos from Samos in the third century BC did.

Not only that, but he also expanded the boundaries of the known Universe, as Archimedes mentions in a funny piece of writing:

quote:
You King Gelon are aware the 'universe' is the name given by most astronomers to the sphere the center of which is the center of the Earth, while its radius is equal to the straight line between the center of the Sun and the center of the Earth. This is the common account as you have heard from astronomers. But Aristarchus has brought out a book consisting of certain hypotheses, wherein it appears, as a consequence of the assumptions made, that the universe is many times greater than the 'universe' just mentioned. His hypotheses are that the fixed stars and the Sun remain unmoved, that the Earth revolves about the Sun on the circumference of a circle, the Sun lying in the middle of the orbit, and that the sphere of fixed stars, situated about the same center as the Sun, is so great that the circle in which he supposes the Earth to revolve bears such a proportion to the distance of the fixed stars as the center of the sphere bears to its surface.


[ 27. February 2008, 16:58: Message edited by: andreas1984 ]

--------------------
Ξέρω εγώ κάτι που μπορούσε, Καίσαρ, να σας σώσει.

Posts: 11285 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349

 - Posted      Profile for Anglican_Brat   Email Anglican_Brat   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by andreas1984:
quote:
Originally posted by bc_anglican:
And when the Church refuses to recognize that, I would be bold to say that it refuses to recognize the will of God working in our lives.

Of course it does, if what you are saying is true! Which is why this is a big issue for me, even though I am not personally influenced by the debate!

Saying that people are born (I think that's what you mean by God making all heterosexual) homosexual however is circular. How do you know?

Take Dawkins for example. In his Extended Phenotype he mentions a scenario of his. There is some genetic basis, he says, but the phenotype for that genotype is far from a clear issue. The phenotype is influenced by environment, so a genotype that had phenotype A in the deep past, it might have been having phenotype B in the past 10.000 years and we might be seeing that phenotype and assume that the genotype is supposed to give that phenotype in the first place when it's not!

Nobody demonizes love. Friendship is very important, and the love between friends is amazing. Which is why John can be the beloved disciple of Jesus without this implying a sexual tension between the two!

So why not see same-sex relationships as deeply intense friendships that include a sexual component?

The relationship between Our Lord and the Beloved Disciple can serve as a model for all relationships, both heterosexual and same-sex. What the participants do behind closed doors in their bed rooms is none of our business.

[ 27. February 2008, 17:00: Message edited by: bc_anglican ]

--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.

Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
El Greco
Shipmate
# 9313

 - Posted      Profile for El Greco   Email El Greco   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by bc_anglican:
]So why not see same-sex relationships as deeply intense friendships that include a sexual component?

Because they are not the equivalent of the heterosexual relationships but this spiritual view of reality cannot be proved by using logical arguments? The alternative to what you are suggesting, as far as I can see is that those advanced on the Way "see" with their spiritual eyes reality as is, and they "see" homosexuality as a passion, and asking them why they see it that way is meaningless... They see it that way because that's the way it is... They see what is.

Of course, saying that the fathers till now did not see the kind of relationships you mention but they saw relationships that were seriously imbalanced might be an answer. And it would satisfy me, if it got ratified not by congregations as if we were a secular democracy, but by modern day Saints (or Saints that recently passed way).

--------------------
Ξέρω εγώ κάτι που μπορούσε, Καίσαρ, να σας σώσει.

Posts: 11285 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349

 - Posted      Profile for Anglican_Brat   Email Anglican_Brat   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
"
Saying that people are born (I think that's what you mean by God making all heterosexual) homosexual however is circular. How do you know?"

While I wouldn't go far as say that sexual orientation is in-born (I think there is still debate over whether it is pre-determined at birth, or influenced by environmental factors), there is overwhelming evidence that sexual orientation is not autonomously chosen, in the way as I might choose a flavor of the ice cream.

Why would anyone choose to be gay or lesbian especially in areas where your life can very much well be in jeopardy?

--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.

Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349

 - Posted      Profile for Anglican_Brat   Email Anglican_Brat   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by andreas1984:
quote:
Originally posted by bc_anglican:
]So why not see same-sex relationships as deeply intense friendships that include a sexual component?

Because they are not the equivalent of the heterosexual relationships .
Why?

If you are going to assert the procreation argument, then you would have to deny marriage to infertile and elderly couples, because they can't conceivably procreate either.

Again, you need to give a reason why the plumbing matters so much to Almighty God. I argue that God doesn't give a rats behind if the parties have a penis or a vagina. What God cares is the quality of the relationship, rather it is characterized by love, joy, commitment, and mutual compassion. To link holiness to plumbing would be crude and IMHO contrary to the entire message of the gospel.

--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.

Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
El Greco
Shipmate
# 9313

 - Posted      Profile for El Greco   Email El Greco   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by bc_anglican:
there is overwhelming evidence that sexual orientation is not autonomously chosen, in the way as I might choose a flavor of the ice cream.

Not being a conscious choice does not make something less sinful. take a married man for example. If he walks on the street and he gets aroused by the many beautiful women he sees, that's not like choosing a flavor of the ice cream either! We are not going to bless that though!

In fact, our passions exist in our subconscious and our unconscious. It is our unconscious that needs to get re-organized, which is why "I am saved cause I accept Jesus Christ as my personal savior" won't work...

And even if I did not choose a certain passion, if it exists within me, it still needs to get dealt with.

--------------------
Ξέρω εγώ κάτι που μπορούσε, Καίσαρ, να σας σώσει.

Posts: 11285 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
El Greco
Shipmate
# 9313

 - Posted      Profile for El Greco   Email El Greco   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by bc_anglican:
Again, you need to give a reason why the plumbing matters so much to Almighty God.

Err, no I don't! Everything cannot be processed by our intellect. I blame it to the scholastics [Razz]

Our minds can see some things, OK, but it is our hearts that are designed to see all things, to process the "words", the "reasons" of beings.

God's reasons are different from human thoughts and are processed by a different organ than our intellect!

--------------------
Ξέρω εγώ κάτι που μπορούσε, Καίσαρ, να σας σώσει.

Posts: 11285 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643

 - Posted      Profile for dj_ordinaire   Author's homepage   Email dj_ordinaire   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
But if things can't be proven by intellectual argument, then why are we even having this debate? If it is beyond intellectual consideration, then how can 'it feels right to me' not be the end of the matter!

In order to argue that gay people are monumentally deluded about the possible holiness of our relationships you have to climb a massive intellectual mountain, introducing any number of concepts, teachings, appeals to what is natural, &c &c. Entering into an intellectual debate and then saying that certain of your premises can't be challenged because there's more to a debate than the intellect appears to me to be cheating!

quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The fact that ostensibly Holy people say it is really isn't enough, not least because I could drag out plenty of ostensibly Holy people who would disagree with them.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It depends what you mean by holy. I think Plotinus and Buddha were holy in their own ways, but I would not dream of introducing their teachings in Christianity! Any Saint of the undivided church of the first millennium? No? Why not?

I'm talking about saints who are members of my own Church - the Church of England. Sanctity didn't drain out of the world with the Great Schism you know, especially not in the land of our Lady's Dowry!

--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...

Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Hooker's Trick

Admin Emeritus and Guardian of the Gin
# 89

 - Posted      Profile for Hooker's Trick   Author's homepage   Email Hooker's Trick   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
So to sum up: consrvatives care about what homos do in bed because it is both yucky and sinful, and the combination of yuckiness and sinfulness is something conservatives (not just conservative Christians, btw) can rally around and form a sense of solidarity -- and (a la Laura and Louise) homosexuals are an easy target for this sort of thing.

Does that about get it?

Posts: 6735 | From: Gin Lane | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349

 - Posted      Profile for Anglican_Brat   Email Anglican_Brat   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Andreas,

I don't mean high-minded systematic theological argument, a la Thomas Aquinas. I mean simply giving a reasoned explanation for your argument.

You have made claims without any evidence. You have said that same-sex relationships are not analogous to heterosexual marriage- relationships. You have not said why. God did not give us brains for us to accept every explanation blindly.

--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.

Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
Comper's Child
Shipmate
# 10580

 - Posted      Profile for Comper's Child     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Hooker's Trick:
So to sum up: consrvatives care about what homos do in bed because it is both yucky and sinful, and the combination of yuckiness and sinfulness is something conservatives (not just conservative Christians, btw) can rally around and form a sense of solidarity -- and (a la Laura and Louise) homosexuals are an easy target for this sort of thing.

Does that about get it?

Sounds right to me...
Posts: 2509 | From: Penn's Greene Countrie Towne | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
Knopwood
Shipmate
# 11596

 - Posted      Profile for Knopwood   Email Knopwood   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by andreas1984:
It's a low form of love, in the sense that having peace among countries is a low form of peace (My peace I give unto you, not like the world...)

Still waiting on why this is more true of homosexual relationships than heterosexual ones. Although frankly I'm beginning to suspect that the emperor's argument has no clothes.
Posts: 6806 | From: Tio'tia:ke | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged
Rosa Winkel

Saint Anger round my neck
# 11424

 - Posted      Profile for Rosa Winkel   Author's homepage   Email Rosa Winkel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
That sounds right, as does what Hooker said.

--------------------
The Disability and Jesus "Locked out for Lent" project

Posts: 3271 | From: Wrocław | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Knopwood
Shipmate
# 11596

 - Posted      Profile for Knopwood   Email Knopwood   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Otter:
the automatic assumption that all homosexuals relationships are shallow and tawdry

I'm actually rather curious about this. I recently went to one of the residences in my college to visit a friend, while she and her floormates predrank before going out for the evening to a college function. While I was there, I met one of the denizens of my friend's hall, who apparently has something of a "pervy" reputation. He remarked to us that on a certain level he wished he were gay, since he would have a more varied and active sex life. I was reminded of Michael Thomas Ford's essay in which his heterosexual friend laments that "If I were gay, I would get head all the time" to which Ford replies in the essay that his friend has clearly never dated any of the men Ford has.

Similarly, I have a friend who is similar to me in many ways. We are both relatively traditional Catholic Anglicans who aspire to the priesthood. He, though, is a heterosexual, and periodically has sexual intercourse with his girlfriend. However, he has made very clear his belief that if I should enter into a union of exclusivity and intended permanence, I should not expect to be considered a suitable candidate for Holy Orders. He says this with no trace of irony, and insists that his relationship is Biblically sanctioned purely because it is heterosexual in nature.

Posts: 6806 | From: Tio'tia:ke | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged
Geneviève

Mother-Hatting Cat Lover
# 9098

 - Posted      Profile for Geneviève   Email Geneviève   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I've long thought that a parallel condition to "white privilege" is "straight boy privilege".

--------------------
"Ineffable" defined: "I cannot and will not be effed with." (Courtesy of CCTooSweet in Running the Books)

Posts: 4336 | From: Eastern US | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
St. Sarcastica
Apprentice
# 13405

 - Posted      Profile for St. Sarcastica   Email St. Sarcastica   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by andreas1984:
Not being a conscious choice does not make something less sinful.

I don`t get that. How can any act be a sin if it`s not a conscious choice? How can you commit a sin without knowledge and consent? How can one be guilty of something without knowing it`s a wrong thing and wanting to do it?
I`m have RC view of morality, perhaps there are branches of Christianity hat see things completely differently. I`m confused.

Posts: 14 | From: Europe | Registered: Feb 2008  |  IP: Logged
St. Sarcastica
Apprentice
# 13405

 - Posted      Profile for St. Sarcastica   Email St. Sarcastica   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by andreas1984:
quote:
Originally posted by St. Sarcastica:
Who did? And did they know the speed of light etc.?

Well, Aristarchos from Samos in the third century BC did.
Okay, that`s Aristarchus. What about the rest of them? A did you miss my point that today we have immense amount of scientific knowledge about the world, nature and ourselves that the ancients didn`t have?

[ 28. February 2008, 03:40: Message edited by: St. Sarcastica ]

Posts: 14 | From: Europe | Registered: Feb 2008  |  IP: Logged
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757

 - Posted      Profile for Ricardus   Author's homepage   Email Ricardus   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by St. Sarcastica:
Okay, that`s Aristarchus. What about the rest of them?

Well, according to Wikipedia quoting someone else, "after the fifth century BCE, no Greek writer of repute thought the world was anything but round." This seems to be fairly uncontroversial to me, though I don't really see why it's relevant.

--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)

Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
TheMightyMartyr
Shipmate
# 11162

 - Posted      Profile for TheMightyMartyr   Email TheMightyMartyr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Liturgy Queen:
quote:
Originally posted by Otter:
the automatic assumption that all homosexuals relationships are shallow and tawdry

I'm actually rather curious about this. I recently went to one of the residences in my college to visit a friend, while she and her floormates predrank before going out for the evening to a college function. While I was there, I met one of the denizens of my friend's hall, who apparently has something of a "pervy" reputation. He remarked to us that on a certain level he wished he were gay, since he would have a more varied and active sex life. I was reminded of Michael Thomas Ford's essay in which his heterosexual friend laments that "If I were gay, I would get head all the time" to which Ford replies in the essay that his friend has clearly never dated any of the men Ford has.

Similarly, I have a friend who is similar to me in many ways. We are both relatively traditional Catholic Anglicans who aspire to the priesthood. He, though, is a heterosexual, and periodically has sexual intercourse with his girlfriend. However, he has made very clear his belief that if I should enter into a union of exclusivity and intended permanence, I should not expect to be considered a suitable candidate for Holy Orders. He says this with no trace of irony, and insists that his relationship is Biblically sanctioned purely because it is heterosexual in nature.

As I'm pretty sure I know who you are talking about, this comment doesnt really surprise me, he is wrong by the way... tell him another Traditional Anglo Catholic says so, I'm even straight to boot!

--------------------
You cannot claim to worship Jesus in the Tabernacle if you do not pity Jesus in the slum.

Posts: 259 | From: the Land of Ingham | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged
El Greco
Shipmate
# 9313

 - Posted      Profile for El Greco   Email El Greco   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by St. Sarcastica:
I don`t get that. How can any act be a sin if it`s not a conscious choice? How can you commit a sin without knowledge and consent? How can one be guilty of something without knowing it`s a wrong thing and wanting to do it?
I`m have RC view of morality, perhaps there are branches of Christianity hat see things completely differently. I`m confused.

Because a man afflicted with passions is not like a criminal, someone to be condemned, but like a very ill person, someone to be healed, and his pain is to be shared.

Sin has to do primarily with the unconscious and the subconscious, which is why it is so difficult to re-arrange one's life and be free of passions and become a whole man.

This is why the focus is not on not sinning... Because if you take away the sinful acts, but you don't resolve the underlying passions, life would be unbearable. The focus is on getting healed first, and then acts of sin will stop and life will become of higher quality.

Posts: 11285 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
El Greco
Shipmate
# 9313

 - Posted      Profile for El Greco   Email El Greco   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by St. Sarcastica:
Okay, that`s Aristarchus. What about the rest of them? A did you miss my point that today we have immense amount of scientific knowledge about the world, nature and ourselves that the ancients didn`t have?

Ricardus did a fine job to show that the Greek speaking world knew... I don't know about people in the far East, but just thinking the ancients were unenlightened while we are is a Big Mistake (that needs to get deconstructed!)

I accept what you are saying about the knowledge we have now available for the world. For example, now we know that the world consists mainly of things we cannot see, like dark energy and dark matter, that the visible world is a small part of creation. We know much, but I still don't think we know that much on sexuality. Perhaps I'm mistaken. I don't know.

--------------------
Ξέρω εγώ κάτι που μπορούσε, Καίσαρ, να σας σώσει.

Posts: 11285 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Bullfrog.

Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014

 - Posted      Profile for Bullfrog.   Email Bullfrog.   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally Posted by St Sarcasticus:
Okay, that`s Aristarchus. What about the rest of them? A did you miss my point that today we have immense amount of scientific knowledge about the world, nature and ourselves that the ancients didn`t have?

We do, in some areas, and yet I wouldn't go from this to assuming that the ancients didn't understand anything.
quote:
Also, from Wikipedia :
The modern belief that especially medieval Christianity believed in a flat earth has been referred to as The Myth of the Flat Earth.[1] In 1945, it was listed by the Historical Association (of Britain) as the second of 20 in a pamphlet on common errors in history.[2] Several scholars[3] have argued that "with extraordinary few exceptions no educated person in the history of Western Civilization from the third century B.C. onward believed that the earth was flat" and that the prevailing view was of a spherical earth.[1] Jeffrey Russell states that the modern view that people of the Middle Ages believed that the Earth was flat is said to have entered the popular imagination in the 19th century, thanks largely to the publication of Washington Irving's fantasy The Life and Voyages of Christopher Columbus in 1828.[1] Although these writers reject the idea of a flat earth, others such as the Flat Earth Society accept or promote the hypothesis.



--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg

Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643

 - Posted      Profile for dj_ordinaire   Author's homepage   Email dj_ordinaire   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
This is all pretty much irrelevant anyway, as there were also many ancient authorities who thought that homosexuality was fine, or even preferable to heterosexuality...

--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...

Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
El Greco
Shipmate
# 9313

 - Posted      Profile for El Greco   Email El Greco   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
If there is any ancient Christian authority feel free to share. Ancient non-Christian authorities are also good... for non-Christians [Razz]

--------------------
Ξέρω εγώ κάτι που μπορούσε, Καίσαρ, να σας σώσει.

Posts: 11285 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
marian
Apprentice
# 12097

 - Posted      Profile for marian   Email marian   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The effect on the church caused by the question of homosexuality is enormous. We all know of churches that are leaving the general body to place themselves under the jurisdiction of foreign bishops. Discussion with members of those congregations is frustrating and astounding. They place their reasoning within the Bible - as well as the Articles of Religion. In our particular church, there is no discussion. Are we hiding under a blanket hoping the storm will pass without causing further damage?
Is the loss of real estate more important than the loss of those parishioners?
And even more important....WHO IS RIGHT?

Posts: 3 | From: canada | Registered: Nov 2006  |  IP: Logged
Rosa Winkel

Saint Anger round my neck
# 11424

 - Posted      Profile for Rosa Winkel   Author's homepage   Email Rosa Winkel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Me.

Ingushetia is occupied by Russian tanks. Civilian young men, taken into custody, and end up dead.

People die of war and disease the world over.

What do people obsess about? A very small group, who are persecuted.

Fucked up priorities.

--------------------
The Disability and Jesus "Locked out for Lent" project

Posts: 3271 | From: Wrocław | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Hooker's Trick

Admin Emeritus and Guardian of the Gin
# 89

 - Posted      Profile for Hooker's Trick   Author's homepage   Email Hooker's Trick   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by marian:
The effect on the church caused by the question of homosexuality is enormous. We all know of churches that are leaving the general body to place themselves under the jurisdiction of foreign bishops. Discussion with members of those congregations is frustrating and astounding. They place their reasoning within the Bible - as well as the Articles of Religion.

The Articles of Religion?

What on earth do the Articles of Religion have to say about sexuality?

(Imagining "Article XL: Of What Homos Do In Bed)

Posts: 6735 | From: Gin Lane | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools