Results 1 to 25 of 120

Thread: Dilemma of Being ****sexual

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Trinity
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Columcille View Post
    Trinity, apparently you don't seem to understand the struggle here. The Church is merciful, but its position unmovable. Asdf is not your buddy in doctrinal arms. What he advocates is that Church changes its doctrinal stance. The following is his words, mark them well, for it seems your playing doesn't understand the undermining of the truth of the Christian faith, most especially for us the truth of the Catholic faith:
    I disagree with her [his] words according to my present religious basis. However, at this time, the science is not supporting one of the two positions with a perfect cer***ude. We were enough ridiculous with the case of Galileo Galilei. I keep a crack in the door.

    Trinity
    Last edited by Trinity; 04-14-2009 at 08:38 PM.

  2. #2
    Columcille
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trinity View Post
    I disagree with her words according to my present religious basis. However, at this time, the science is not supporting one of the two positions with a perfect cer***ude. We were enough ridiculous with the case of Galileo Galilei. I keep a crack in the door.

    Trinity
    So you would choose politicized science over Scriptural and Traditional principles that ****sexuality is sinful? As far as Galileo Galilei is concerned, what moral practice was it supposedly supporting? Do you think in your "present religious basis" that a new ecumenical council or papal decree or some "ex cathedra" statement is going to trump the longstanding Law of God that ****sexuality is sinful? Is Catholicism's doctrine and moral basis going to contradict itself? I would call that a lack of faith; a lack of trust in God's word both in season and out of season, as it is maintained in Tradition and found in Scripture.

  3. #3
    Trinity
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Columcille View Post
    So you would choose politicized science over Scriptural and Traditional principles that ****sexuality is sinful? As far as Galileo Galilei is concerned, what moral practice was it supposedly supporting? Do you think in your "present religious basis" that a new ecumenical council or papal decree or some "ex cathedra" statement is going to trump the longstanding Law of God that ****sexuality is sinful? Is Catholicism's doctrine and moral basis going to contradict itself? I would call that a lack of faith.
    No.

    Like many Catholics I do not force my belief with an at***ude of intransigency. I propose my faith, I do not dictate it.

    Trinity

  4. #4
    Columcille
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trinity View Post
    No.

    Like many Catholics I do not force my belief with an at***ude of intransigency. I propose my faith, I do not dictate it.

    Trinity
    You know, every prophet in the O.T. and even the Apostles in the N.T. never was scared to speak the naked truth concerning what was sinful. The watchtower p***age of Ezekiel 33 clearly lays down God's teaching to a sinful nation and the duty from which we must clearly stand against. Faith is trust in God, doing as God asks of us. You can propose your faith, you can even lay out the boundaries that God has spoken and set. Asdf thinks you can be a good Christian practicing ****sexuality unashamed. And by Christian, that extends to Catholics and Protestant alike. If he held this position as a Catholic, he would be branded a Cafeteria Catholic. Of course he is not Catholic, but claims to be a Christian. We call many Protestants our seperate brothers and sisters, yet with such a moral decay, I would hardly be welcoming them in a state of unabashed sinfulness.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •