Cooper is the reporter. Robinson is the new bishop (or whatever)...

[b]COOPER:[/b] As you well know, there are many conservatives in the church who say the Scriptures condemn homosexuality. How do you respond to that?

[b]ROBINSON:[/b] We'd need two days to talk about that. But what I would say is what we're talking today about faithful, monogamous, lifelong intentioned relationships between people of the same sex is just simply not addressed in Scripture. The references ... are to people who are thought to be heterosexually oriented who are acting in homosexual [ways], which is against their nature. The whole [issue] of sexual orientation is only about 100 years old.

[red]Im sure he will not be the only priest in hell.[/red]

Guess he never heard of the Romans,Greeks etc.I really wish people would read up on a issue before speaking about it.

This so-called bishop is an absolute idiot.

I guess Sodom and Gemorrah never existed.

[rolleyes]

Darn near biting my own tongue off.

Agreed, not to high on the intellect scale.

"The whole [issue] of sexual orientation is only about 100 years old"  (?)

Brilliant observation there Einstein! Tell me, how old is masturbation?

A horse, by any other name, is still a horse.

Wheat from the chaff, coming soon to a church near you.

(Just try to be careful on the judgment there.)

--LS

Believe it or not, I think its absolutely possible that there will be a lot of homosexueals in Heaven. Wether you believe it or not, all sin is basically the same. This priest still has a chance...

However, when you are put in a position of religious power and you PERVERT it as such, well, Im guessing God is extra unhappy with it.

And to keep in mind...Those who are greatest on Earth will be the least in Heaven.

Yep. DA, I think we are on the same page.

--LS

God loves the sinner, but hates the sin...  One advocating said sin will be judged.  Have to draw that distinction. (You guys have already done so)

TS

No Rev. it does.And just about any Romans did.It also condems jerking off too,which would condem most males over 14 yrs to hell.

A gay priest or bishop is like a Muslim Jew.  Don't mix.

TS

What passage are you using for the condemnation of masturbators?

TS

Sorry about that to many beers....I think old testament [Catholic school]

Maybe ther one about lust?  

Yep. Lusting after a women is the same as (biblical term) fornication with said woman.  Coveting, etc.

TS

I don't think so I remember the nuns telling us the spilling of your seed was a mortal sin.I'll look it up

From memory, so maybe not exact: It is better to cast one's seed into the belly of a whore than upon a rock.

I've been told, and it seems logical to me, that this was due to a need for more Hebrew soldiers because of the wars with Caananites, Philistines, etc.

This could be off just as much as the good priest's interpretation though.

TS

While we're off the subject, anyone know where it says that it would be better to tie a millstone about one's neck than to lead one of these little ones (children) astray?

TS

How big a sin is it,to have to dig though weapons books to find your bible?

I'm just going to hell.

TS

If that's the case then the gay bishop going to have a lot of company.[alot of Catholic preists] sorry of jacking the thread DA.

According to one local Episcopalian priest, if a straight priest was unfaithful to his wife and promiscuous like this guy, he would no longer be a priest, much less have a chance to become a bishop.  It's a strange double-standard.  He's married and living with someone else.  What kind of example does that set for the church members?z

I don't buy the whole lusting thing as it relates to masturbation. IMO, you don't have to be lusting in order to touch yourself, and vice versa. So, other than the lust, the only scripture that I recall, that is used against masturbation, is the one from the Old Testament where Onan was required to sleep with his dead brother's wife in order to impregnate her, so that his brother's name would continue. Upon sleeping with her, he pulled out and spilled his semen on the ground. He was struck dead. Does that condemn masturbation? I don't think so, and certainly not directly. It would seem to me that him being mean, being dishonest, etc., were probably more to blame than the fact that he spilled his semen, since, in other parts of the Old Testament, it was discussed how a man could cleanse himself after having an emission of semen, and no mention was made about what caused that emission and it being a sin.

As to the sermon that Jesus preached, where He said such things lusting after a woman was the same as fornication, and hating was the same as murder, here's I question that I have. We know that Jesus came to fulfill the law, and to justify people apart from the law. Apparently, however, some people thought that they were saved by keeping the law. Did Jesus preach all of that in order to show them that they DID need a savior, or was he simply giving us newer, and harder, rules to live by? I'm undecided, personally, but Galations would seem to point out that we ARE NOT under a stricter law than the Old Testament one, in my opinion.

[Edited for spelling]

Johnpin - you said it. How can you be undecided.

There is no possible way we can keep the law. We are saved by Grace not by works.  

You know as well as I do that Jesus said "I AM the Way, the truth and the light, no man shall come unto the father but by Me.""

Jesus wept.

Yes he did.