National Cathedral to perform same-se...

National Cathedral to perform same-sex weddings

There are 124 comments on the The Northwestern in Oshkosh story from Jan 8, 2013, titled National Cathedral to perform same-sex weddings. In it, The Northwestern in Oshkosh reports that:

The Washington National Cathedral, where the nation gathers to mourn tragedies and celebrate new presidents, will soon begin performing same-sex marriages.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Northwestern in Oshkosh.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#45 Jan 9, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>Your ridiculous fantasies only make YOU look pathetic, as well as your horrible hate based radical homosexual cause.
You are a liar that cannot substantiate your filthy fantasies and your lie about my identity.
This is a thread dealing with the tragedy of a national house of worship being usurped from its original purposes to celebrate relationships that the Christian Bible repeatedly condemns.
We all know it's you David, and we all know what you've done.

Shame on you.....

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#46 Jan 9, 2013
"If Jesus ever said anything about homosexuality, it is not recorded in the Bible, even mistranslated. He did, however, speak extensively on God's unconditional love. Yet instead of dwelling on biblical love, Christians have historically been more concerned with obscure passages of Levitical cleanliness codes and Paul's misunderstood comments in Romans. Instead of focusing on the incredible injustice and hatred demonstrated by Christians and others, tying to deny homosexuals even basic civil rights, people appear more concerned with the specific homosexual acts between consenting adults who are naturally have a homosexual orientation. As James B. Nelson notes, the Bible more clearly advocates a "love ethic" rather than a "sex ethic."

I Cor 6:9, no way refers to homosexuality. The original Greek word often quoted as sexual immorality, Paul used was "porneia" which means "a harlot for hire". In Corinth in the temples of Venus, the principal deity of Corinth, where Christians went to worship, a thousand public prostitutes were kept at public expense to glorify and act as surrogates for the fertility Gods. This sex with the pagan Gods is what Paul was talking about - fornication is an admitted mistranslation and has nothing to do with gays or singles sex. This rendering reflected the bias of the translators rather than an accurate translation of Paul's words to a culture of 2000 years ago worshipping pagan sex gods.

Romans 1:26-27 mentions homosexual acts performed by people who are clearly described as heterosexual. The men in the NT patriarchal culture exerted dominance not only over women, but over younger males as well. The nature of homosexual acts in the Bible are so very different from what we know as homosexuality today that the passages have no application to today's homosexuality. Such practices as in NT times simply no longer exist. Alleged references to homosexuality in I Corinthians and I Timothy are the inventions of anti-gay translators. They are not in the original Greek texts." (Rev.Dr. Mel White)

The word "homosexual" wasn't even invented until 1869. When you see it in the bible, you know it is a modern mistranslation and misinterpretation of the original texts.

"What the Bible forbids is acts of lust, rape, idolatry, violation of religious purity obligations, or pederasty, but no condemnation of homosexuality in relationships of mutual respect and love. "On the other hand, the Bible pointedly celebrates instances of same-sex emotional intimacy, a fact often overlooked by fearful homophobic readers." James B. Nelson, Professor of Christian Ethics, United Theological Seminary

Yet Jesus told us:

John 13:34: A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another.

John 15:12 My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you.

Matthew 7:1: "Do not judge, or you too will be judged.

Luke 6:37: "Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven.

Matthew 7:12: So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#47 Jan 9, 2013
fr "Reed", aka DAVID MOORE OF PEKIN IL:

>It ...<

David, quit spamming the board.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#49 Jan 9, 2013
If you are going to use Matthew 19 as an excuse to assume Jesus only approved of one man, one woman relationships, you need to read it in context of 1-12...

Matthew 19:8 He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.
19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.
19:10 His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry.
19:11 But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given.
19:12 For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.

"According to Jesus, born eunuchs are exempt from the Adam and Eve style heterosexual marriage paradigm.

Eunuchs so born from their mother’s womb. These eunuchs, according to Jesus, were born that way. They did not make a personal choice to be eunuchs and they were not physically castrated by men. Some Christians believe these men were homosexual eunuchs." http://www.gaychristian101.com/Homosexual-Eun...

So divorce is specifically prohibited, yet we ignore that one. And clearly, opposite sex marriage isn't for everyone.

“Equality for ALL”

Since: Jul 10

Massachusetts

#50 Jan 9, 2013
Reed wrote:
<quoted text>It is quite doubtful that most Episcopalians accept homosexual behavior as moral. Doing so is in conflict with their own founding and defining documents.
But don't the Episcopalians get to define what their religion is today? Regardless of what they originally believed don't they have the right to say this is we believe today? And yes, some may feel that is a change they are unwilling to accept and leave the church. Others looking for a belief system may find their belief system attractive and seek to join.

But that is their right of religious freedom. And your right of religious freedom to join a religion that fills your needs.

Every religion gets to define the tenets of their religion.

Religious Freedom.

Not every church, even ones that describe themselves as christian, have to believe the same thing.

Religious Freedom.

Not every religion that uses the bible as their religious text understands it the same way.

Religious Freedom.

Some religions will not sactify or bless same-sex marriages.

Religious Freedom.

Some religions sanctify and bless same-sex marriages.

Religious Freedom.

There is a church in Kentucky (?) that will not sanctify or bless inter-racial marriages.

Religious Freedom.

There are some churches that will not marry divorced individuals.

Religious Freedom.

Starting to get the picture?
AzAdam

Mesa, AZ

#51 Jan 9, 2013
Really the religions make this shtuff up as they go along. If you don't think so, look at aaaaaallllll the different religions from one book. You, whoever you are, pick and choose the parts that are important and the parts that aren't. The translations that are credible and the ones that aren't. Not one of you follow it to the letter. Why should you tell others what to believe?

So if you're going to quote a Bible verse, stop, reconsider. Nobody here is going to credit you with the authority or expertise to determine for them how the Bible is to be interpreted. What parts are important and what parts aren't. They simply aren't. Your Bible verses bring NOTHING to the conversation. You might as well say, "it's my opinion."

Opinions, bible verses, doctrines, butt holes, everybody has one. Yours is not special to anyone but you.
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#52 Jan 9, 2013
Reed wrote:
How tragic that a formerly Christian structure is used for a very un-Christian activity!
The Bible is the basis of Christianity and all homosexual behavior is repeatedly condemned in the plainest of language in both Testaments.
It's sad to see an historic denomination hijacked by anti-Christian philosophies.
You religious terrorists gave religion a black eye
.
We're breathing new life into glorious old churches around the world
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/04/10/art...

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

#53 Jan 9, 2013
Reed wrote:
How tragic that a formerly Christian structure is used for a very un-Christian activity!
The Bible is the basis of Christianity and all homosexual behavior is repeatedly condemned in the plainest of language in both Testaments.
It's sad to see an historic denomination hijacked by anti-Christian philosophies.
How tragic that you are back to your numerous false names again CALEB, MAX, REED,DAVID MOORE. Tell us, how are Sharon and Sue and Udell doing? Do you miss East Peoria? You see, your lies are not fooling ANYONE, liar.

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

#54 Jan 9, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>Your ridiculous fantasies only make YOU look pathetic, as well as your horrible hate based radical homosexual cause.
You are a liar that cannot substantiate your filthy fantasies and your lie about my identity.
This is a thread dealing with the tragedy of a national house of worship being usurped from its original purposes to celebrate relationships that the Christian Bible repeatedly condemns
Talk about a LIAR, DAN, REED, JAYCE, CALEB, MAX, and of course, DAVID MOORE. Why do you keep LYING, LIAR? Whom do you think you are fooling with your endless stream of FALSE names, LIAR? When will you stop LYING, liar?

Since we catch you in endless lies, anything you say is suspect to be lies also, liar. Pants on fire.

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

#55 Jan 9, 2013
RalphB wrote:
<quoted text>
Please.....quit holding back and tell us what you really think. Don't be so reticent.
Ahh, shucks! T'weren't nothin'!

Those tools don't deserve anything approaching normal communication, for they are immune to reason or human feelings. I hit them below their belt, for I can dish it out far more vicious than any hater on here. I grew up with a life time of dealing with bullies and I found out decades ago that a bully only backs off when he is afraid.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#56 Jan 10, 2013
James Aist wrote:
.......Then He defined marriage as the union of a man and a woman, as evidenced by His referring to Eve as Adam’s wife. And in Matthew 19:4-6, Jesus confirmed the definition of marriage in Genesis 2:“Haven’t you read,” he replied,“that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’and said,‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh........
Jesus was NOT defining legal marriage, he was explaining why divorce is not allowed, after being asked a direct question about divorce.

And we KNOW that most Christians intentionally ignore Jesus on that point. Trying to twist scripture into something it is not is ridiculous. Even the denominations most opposed to gay people falling in love and forming families support the ability to divorce, in direct disobedience to the Savior.

At least be honest.
George

Jacksonville, FL

#57 Jan 10, 2013
DaveinMass wrote:
<quoted text>
But don't the Episcopalians get to define what their religion is today? Regardless of what they originally believed don't they have the right to say this is we believe today? And yes, some may feel that is a change they are unwilling to accept and leave the church. Others looking for a belief system may find their belief system attractive and seek to join.
But that is their right of religious freedom. And your right of religious freedom to join a religion that fills your needs.
Every religion gets to define the tenets of their religion.
Religious Freedom.
Not every church, even ones that describe themselves as christian, have to believe the same thing.
Religious Freedom.
Not every religion that uses the bible as their religious text understands it the same way.
Religious Freedom.
Some religions will not sactify or bless same-sex marriages.
Religious Freedom.
Some religions sanctify and bless same-sex marriages.
Religious Freedom.
There is a church in Kentucky (?) that will not sanctify or bless inter-racial marriages.
Religious Freedom.
There are some churches that will not marry divorced individuals.
Religious Freedom.
Starting to get the picture?
Of course Episcopagans can call themselves Christian. They can also call themselves Martians, the NY Yankees or the Bolshoi Ballet. Each of those is as close to the truth as is the claim that they remain a Christian church. Free speech gives them the right to claim all kinds of things about themselves just as it gives the rest of us the right to shout from the rooftops that this emperor has no clothes.
JrEsq

El Segundo, CA

#58 Jan 10, 2013
It perplexes me that a homosexual would want to set foot in a church, since most homosexuals are atheist, like Jane Dodolott. They must want to get married in a church just to prove that they can. That of course is the same reason a male dog licks his nuts.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#60 Jan 10, 2013
George wrote:
Of course Episcopagans can call themselves Christian. They can also call themselves Martians, the NY Yankees or the Bolshoi Ballet. Each of those is as close to the truth as is the claim that they remain a Christian church. Free speech gives them the right to claim all kinds of things about themselves just as it gives the rest of us the right to shout from the rooftops that this emperor has no clothes.
Um, dear, isn't it God who gets the final say as to who has gotten his Christianity right and who hasn't? Your certitude that He is in agreement with you on this is all well and good, but until God Himself actually weighs in on the issue, you are offering us nothing more than your opinion and praying it His. Good luck with that, your less than Christlike way of voicing your opinion however, makes me think that you're already in trouble.
JrEsq

El Segundo, CA

#61 Jan 10, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>Um, dear, isn't it God who gets the final say as to who has gotten his Christianity right and who hasn't? Your certitude that He is in agreement with you on this is all well and good, but until God Himself actually weighs in on the issue, you are offering us nothing more than your opinion and praying it His. Good luck with that, your less than Christlike way of voicing your opinion however, makes me think that you're already in trouble.
Yes, God designed man, and he probably is not pleased when a man repurposes another man's wrecktum as an erogenous zone.
George

Jacksonville, FL

#62 Jan 10, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>Um, dear, isn't it God who gets the final say as to who has gotten his Christianity right and who hasn't? Your certitude that He is in agreement with you on this is all well and good, but until God Himself actually weighs in on the issue, you are offering us nothing more than your opinion and praying it His. Good luck with that, your less than Christlike way of voicing your opinion however, makes me think that you're already in trouble.
Not just my opinion but one shared by a great many if not most Christians. 2,000 years of history also leads to that conclusion. Christianiy is a human construct derived from divine revelation. It is the product of "opinions" about what God has revealed about many things. Without Christians having voiced their "opinions" there would be no Christianity.
Reed

Pekin, IL

#63 Jan 10, 2013
DaveinMass wrote:
<quoted text>
But don't the Episcopalians get to define what their religion is today? Regardless of what they originally believed don't they have the right to say this is we believe today? And yes, some may feel that is a change they are unwilling to accept and leave the church. Others looking for a belief system may find their belief system attractive and seek to join.
But that is their right of religious freedom. And your right of religious freedom to join a religion that fills your needs.
Every religion gets to define the tenets of their religion.
Religious Freedom.
Not every church, even ones that describe themselves as christian, have to believe the same thing.
Religious Freedom.
Not every religion that uses the bible as their religious text understands it the same way.
Religious Freedom.
Some religions will not sactify or bless same-sex marriages.
Religious Freedom.
Some religions sanctify and bless same-sex marriages.
Religious Freedom.
There is a church in Kentucky (?) that will not sanctify or bless inter-racial marriages.
Religious Freedom.
There are some churches that will not marry divorced individuals.
Religious Freedom.
Starting to get the picture?
The problem is, this practice is a departure from the Christian Faith. It is also doubtful that a majority of Episcopalians support such an anti-Biblical stance. ECUSA is a much smaller church today than it was when some of its leadership started anti-Bible policies. They have to hold the property of many of their parishes hostage to keep them from leaving. Despite that, many have including entire diocese (church districts). In Illinois, one of three diocese has left ECUSA, one just ignores this sort of nonsense from the national leadership, and the third is considerably smaller than it was with many members and entire parishes leaving.

“Equality for ALL”

Since: Jul 10

Massachusetts

#65 Jan 10, 2013
Reed wrote:
The problem is, this practice is a departure from the Christian Faith. It is also doubtful that a majority of Episcopalians support such an anti-Biblical stance. ECUSA is a much smaller church today than it was when some of its leadership started anti-Bible policies. They have to hold the property of many of their parishes hostage to keep them from leaving. Despite that, many have including entire diocese (church districts). In Illinois, one of three diocese has left ECUSA, one just ignores this sort of nonsense from the national leadership, and the third is considerably smaller than it was with many members and entire parishes leaving.
BUT YOU DO NOT GET TO DECIDE FOR THE EPISCOPALIANS, OR ANY OTHER RELIGION EXCEPT YOUR OWN!!!!

Unless you are an Episcopalian why would you care what their religious tenets were or now are? If you are an Episcopalian, then you can either try to influence a change back or seek out a new religious community that you can agree with. But if you are not Episcopalian, THEN IT'S NONE OF YOUR CONCERN!!!!!

That is the essence of Freedom of Religion.

I don't know (or care) which church you belong to. But should I, as a non-coreligionist have a say on your religions tenets? No, of course not. SO STAY OUT OF THE AFFAIRS OF OTHER RELIGIONS THAT ARE NOT YOURS!!!!

“Equality for ALL”

Since: Jul 10

Massachusetts

#66 Jan 10, 2013
George wrote:
Of course Episcopagans can call themselves Christian. They can also call themselves Martians, the NY Yankees or the Bolshoi Ballet. Each of those is as close to the truth as is the claim that they remain a Christian church. Free speech gives them the right to claim all kinds of things about themselves just as it gives the rest of us the right to shout from the rooftops that this emperor has no clothes.
???? This has nothing to do with speech.

It is the Freedom of a Religion to determine the Tenets and Beliefs of Their Religion as an internal process.

If you do not like those tenets, you have the Freedom of Religion to not become a member of said religion and to choose to become a member of another religion that you do agree with (or none).

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#67 Jan 10, 2013
George wrote:
Not just my opinion but one shared by a great many if not most Christians.{/QUOTE]Sweetie, it really doesn't matter how many of your fellow Christians believe you to be right if God don't.[QUOTE who="George"]2,000 years of history also leads to that conclusion.
You can rationalize your choice of beliefs however you want, but it still doesn't serve as proof of God being in agreement with your choices.
George wrote:
Christianiy is a human construct derived from divine revelation. It is the product of "opinions" about what God has revealed about many things. Without Christians having voiced their "opinions" there would be no Christianity.
Yet God divinely reveals Himself in different and quite frequently mutually exclusive ways to different Christians, odd that.

You have every right to your opinion, I just wanted to point out that in my opinion, I find it hard to believe that God would want to agree with it. Convincing me that your choice of opinions has been divinely revealed to you, not so much.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Transgender Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Eddie Redmayne stuns in first trailer for trans... 3 hr TerryE 1
News Transgender clinic opens 3 hr huey goins 47
News Georgia parole board releases transgender inmat... 4 hr TerryE 1
lookin for top jeddah (Jul '10) 6 hr foofoo 2,049
meet here gays.(. jeddah) (Feb '10) 8 hr munna9162 13,931
News Is Polygamy the Next Gay Marriage? (Sep '14) 13 hr nhjeff 8,798
News Councillor calls for extra support for the LGBT... 17 hr Belle Sexton 1
goodlooking filipino offering massage in jeddah (Jul '13) Mon hay12345 552
More from around the web