Today is Sunday - A day of rest and a day of peace.  So no replies to comments today. 

What I will post are two articles displaying interfaith dialogue and how it promotes peace.  Peace to all.

Have a peaceful Sunday,
Chezz

Muslims, Christians Discuss Faith and Reason in Rome

1^st May 2008

VATICAN CITY (Zenit) - Benedict XVI was pleased to see representatives of Catholicism and Islam considering faith and reason in their respective creeds.

A statement from the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue and the Tehran-based Center for Interreligious Dialogue of the Islamic Culture and Relations Organization affirmed the Pope's "great satisfaction" when he received representatives from their groups after the general audience today.

At the end of the meeting the participants agreed that faith and reason are both gifts of God to mankind.

They affirmed that faith and reason do not contradict each other, and that though faith might in some cases be above reason, it is never against it.

"Faith and reason are intrinsically nonviolent," the participants affirmed. "Neither reason nor faith should be used for violence; unfortunately, both of them have been sometimes misused to perpetrate violence. In any case, these events cannot question either reason or faith."

Both sides agreed to cooperate in promoting genuine religiosity, in particular spirituality, to encourage respect for symbols considered to be sacred and to promote moral values.

The participants concluded that Christians and Muslims should go beyond tolerance, accepting differences, while remaining aware of commonalities and thanking God for them. "They are called to mutual respect, thereby condemning derision of religious beliefs," the concluding statement affirmed.

It added: "Generalization should be avoided when speaking of religions. Differences of confessions within Christianity and Islam [and] diversity of historical contexts are important factors to be considered.

"Religious traditions cannot be judged on the basis of a single verse or a passage present in their respective holy books. A holistic vision as well as an adequate hermeneutical method is necessary for a fair understanding of them."

The participants expressed their satisfaction with the level of the presentations and the debates, the concluding statement noted, as well as the open and friendly atmosphere during the colloquium.

 

 

Interfaith dialogue may usher in new era

3^rd May 2008

Muslims, Christians and Jews in America already share a commitment to interfaith work characterized over the years as friendly and respectful with tangible results.

For me, this was best demonstrated during the first few days after the Sept. 11 attacks. Two nights after the tragedy, a lone gunman fired at worshippers leaving the Idriss Mosque near Northgate. Mercifully, nobody was hurt.

The next morning, the shooting was a top national news story — ours was one of the first mosques attacked after Sept. 11.

I arrived at the mosque around 6:30 a.m. to speak to the media. Shortly after 7 a.m., the first of many neighbors and citizens began to arrive with flowers, cards and offers to help secure our place of prayer.

Many of these volunteers were from the local interfaith community. They showed up in force offering to guard the mosque. People from the Church Council of Seattle and the interfaith community wound up standing guard day and night. They camped on our doorstep for the next three weeks to protect the city's largest mosque.

We had, over the years, shared coffee and discussions on religion with many of these faith-loving people. But those three weeks in 2001 ushered in a new chapter for our communities.

In the months that followed, we began to feel special trust in our brethren based on action, not just on words. We discovered that risking one's life for another's safety was a shared belief among faiths.

In early Islamic history, Prophet Muhammad drew up a pluralistic constitution that spelled out the duties of Muslims and people of other faiths in the city of Madinah (near Mecca). The people were to protect each other from threats to their security, uphold moral conduct and deal with each other fairly.

Thereafter, tolerance became the rule for non-Muslims living in Islamic lands. Churches and synagogues were protected by Muslims; non-Muslims were free to practice their own faiths.

I am proud the Seattle area interfaith community came together in those uncertain times; nearly seven years later we are a stronger, more trusting and more peaceful community.

Today, our local mosques are recognized religious institutions, and they've become venues for dialogue among all faiths.

By engaging in interfaith dialogue, world religious leaders have the power to usher in a new era of religious cooperation and understanding. Protecting the right of religious freedom and understanding our differences is precious, because our most universal quality is diversity.

Over time, such interfaith efforts carry us toward the day of peaceful brotherhood and sisterhood among all God's children.

The full story of the destroyed city of Sodom. The scripture and the deceptions by the church we don’t seem to see or we are not shown by the church itself or by the better educated people in Bible verse.

 

A comment from my previous post said I had left out the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, actually I did and I didn’t.  I quoted the relevant place to find it i.e. “Gn 19:1-11” I just didn’t quote the actual written text or comment on it.  One reason was because I knew it was a long passage and the other was to do the passage justice I would have to spend a lot of time on this text.  However, I have decided to comment on it because I need to as this text is used quite often to damn gay people and the text is actually taken out of context.  What I didn’t realise I would discover is how many lives have been killed because of that passage.  The further I looked the more disgusted I became.  The more ashamed I became that I call myself a Christian.  I am not exaggerating how this has shaken the very foundation of what I believe.  It now past 2am in the morning and I should be asleep but I can’t sleep, because of the story and its destruction through the middle ages and beyond. I had posted this as a comment but I am about to turn this into its own post because this is a story that seldom gets told and it needs to be told and it needs to be spread.  So if this post seems long, I apologise for that, but please try to get through to the end or at least start from “This Bible passage explains why Sodom was destroyed” and continue to the end.  So here is the truth.

 

 

 

We never hear the real story and the real story has more than one story line to it, but we just don’t see them, all we are shown are the wicked acts of the men of Sodom and these acts are said to be male to male sexual intercourse and that is why Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed.  The real reason these cities were destroyed is more than what is told in Genesis, but you are never shown the real reasons by the people with their anti-Gay agenda, but I will and so will the Bible.

 

 

This is the text that is always quoted by those against gay men.

Genesis 19:1-11 KJV: And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground; And he said, Behold now, my lords, turn in, I pray you, into your servant's house, and tarry all night, and wash your feet, and ye shall rise up early, and go on your ways. And they said, Nay; but we will abide in the street all night. And he pressed upon them greatly; and they turned in unto him, and entered into his house; and he made them a feast, and did bake unleavened bread, and they did eat. But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter: And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them. And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him, And said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly. Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof. And they said, Stand back. And they said again, This one fellow came in to sojourn, and he will needs be a judge: now will we deal worse with thee, than with them. And they pressed sore upon the man, even Lot, and came near to break the door. But the men put forth their hand, and pulled Lot into the house to them, and shut to the door. And they smote the men that were at the door of the house with blindness, both small and great: so that they wearied themselves to find the door.

Now there is the story line that the men of Sodom are wicked and they wanted to have their way with the new men in town.  But I don’t know why many people seem to overlook the fact that Lot was about to give up his daughters to these wicked men so that the men could have their way with them i.e. rape them.  If these girls were to be raped they would lose their virginity and find it difficult to find a male partner ever again and they actually had two men who they were due to marry, but those men in those times would not have married them after being raped due to the girl’s disgrace.  Quite frankly it is possible that after being raped they may have been stoned to death.

 

So the real story is the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, plus the story of Lot

But the story of Lot is never pointed out by those with a different agenda. The story of Lot is very significant as far as a teaching from the Bible.  Lot chose to live near Sodom for selfish reasons and always chose the easiest course of action generally at the expense of doing the right thing.  Lot mainly thought of himself when he made decisions.  By trying to be accepted by the people of his adopted homeland Sodom, he was prepared to sacrifice his two daughters.  The result of Lot’s selfishness and greed was the ruin of his family and the loss of his fortune.  He witnessed his wife’s death for her disobedience to God, a disobedience Lot had modeled for her.  His daughter’s followed Lot’s example too.  They used drunkenness, seduction and incest with their father, the quickest and easiest means available to overcome their lonely childless state brought on by their father’s actions.

The lessons from the full text are:

If we live for comfort and wealth, they will come between us and our families.

We must take care of our responsibilities to God and people if we want our lives to be successful.

Mistakes made by parents often lead to similar mistakes by their children.

When we put our desires for wealth and comfort before obedience to God, the results will be destructive.

For the story of Lot in this context you need to read:

Genesis 13

Genesis 14

Genesis 18: 16 – 33

Genesis 19

 

This Bible passage explains why Sodom was destroyed:

God is disgusted by the unfaithful of Jerusalem and compares Jerusalem to Sodom.

Ezekiel 16: 49 – 50. KJV. Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good.

Ezekiel 16: 44 – 58. NIV " 'Everyone who quotes proverbs will quote this proverb about you: "Like mother, like daughter." You are a true daughter of your mother, who despised her husband and her children; and you are a true sister of your sisters, who despised their husbands and their children. Your mother was a Hittite and your father an Amorite. Your older sister was Samaria, who lived to the north of you with her daughters; and your younger sister, who lived to the south of you with her daughters, was Sodom. You not only walked in their ways and copied their detestable practices, but in all your ways you soon became more depraved than they. As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, your sister Sodom and her daughters never did what you and your daughters have done.

 

Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen. Samaria did not commit half the sins you did. You have done more detestable things than they, and have made your sisters seem righteous by all these things you have done. Bear your disgrace, for you have furnished some justification for your sisters. Because your sins were more vile than theirs, they appear more righteous than you. So then, be ashamed and bear your disgrace, for you have made your sisters appear righteous.

 

'However, I will restore the fortunes of Sodom and her daughters and of Samaria and her daughters, and your fortunes along with them, so that you may bear your disgrace and be ashamed of all you have done in giving them comfort. And your sisters, Sodom with her daughters and Samaria with her daughters, will return to what they were before; and you and your daughters will return to what you were before. You would not even mention your sister Sodom in the day of your pride, before your wickedness was uncovered. Even so, you are now scorned by the daughters of Edom and all her neighbors and the daughters of the Philistines—all those around you who despise you. You will bear the consequences of your lewdness and your detestable practices, declares the LORD.

The full chapter can be found here

As you can see the reason that Sodom was destroyed was for many reasons and not just actions related to “Men knowing each other” and at one point in time Jerusalem’s actions were even seen in God’s eyes as worse than the city of Sodom.

Sodom is also mentioned in other contexts as well, as an example to others for not listening to the words of Jesus and his disciples.  These towns or homes were considered worse than the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Matthew 10:12-15 NIV. As you enter the home, give it your greeting. If the home is deserving, let your peace rest on it; if it is not, let your peace return to you. If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town. I tell you the truth, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town.

 

 

Matthew 11:20-24 NIV.  Then Jesus began to denounce the cities in which most of his miracles had been performed, because they did not repent. "Woe to you, Korazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I tell you, it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgement than for you. And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted up to the skies? No, you will go down to the depths. If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Sodom, it would have remained to this day.  But I tell you that it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you."

 

I believe a huge injustice has been done to gay men in this case, because generally the destruction of Sodom has been largely blamed on “men knowing each other”.  I am not an expert of the Bible but I bet the Christians who throw the Sodom and Gomorrah story around, know about these other pieces of scripture in the bible, but they choose not to bring it to our attention. 

The scripture from Ezekiel is not an easy piece to find as I don’t think Ezekiel is a well quoted book of the Bible, I could be wrong, but it isn’t a book which immediately springs to mind when one thinks of the Bible.  It shows how strong the association with Sodom and male gay sex is when the name given to anal sex and other ‘immoral’ sex acts is sodomy i.e. “sin of Sodom”.  But in reality there were many sins of Sodom. 

But it gets worse when we look at how the meaning of the scripture from Ezekiel becomes distorted through the ages and we see the ramifications.

The thirteenth-century Jewish scholar Nachmanides wrote this in regards to the destruction of Sodom, “According to our sages, they were notorious for every evil, but their fate was sealed for their persistence in not supporting the poor and the needy.” His contemporary Rabbenu Yonah expresses the same view: “Scripture attributes their annihilation to their failure to practice tzedakah [charity or justice].” (Source)

The Book of Wisdom, which is included in the Bible by Orthodox and Roman Catholics, but excluded by modern Jews, Protestants, and other Christian denominations, makes reference to the story of Sodom, further emphasizing that their sin had been failing to practice hospitability:

Wisdom 19:13 14 KJV. And punishments came upon the sinners not without former signs by 
the force of thunders: for they suffered justly according to their own wickedness, insomuch as they 
used a more hard and hateful behaviour toward strangers. For the Sodomites did not receive 
those, whom they knew not when they came: but these brought friends into bondage, that had 
well deserved of them. 

 

Here is where it starts to go down hill.  I am totally disgusted by this.

The primarily sexual meaning of the word sodomia for Christians did not evolve before the 500s AD. Byzantine Emperor Justinian I, in his novels no. 77 and no. 141 amended to his Corpus iuris civilis, was the first to declare that Sodom's sin had been specifically same-sex activities and desire for them in order to create homosexual scapegoats for recent earthquakes and other disasters of his time (535-536CE).

 

NOVEL 71

…since certain men, seized by diabolical incitement practice among themselves the most disgraceful lusts, and act contrary to nature: we enjoin them to take to heart the fear of God and the judgment to come, and to abstain from suchlike diabolical and unlawful lusts, so that they may not be visited by the just wrath of God on account of these impious acts, with the result that cities perish with all their inhabitants. For we are taught by the Holy Scriptures that because of like impious conduct cities have indeed perish, together with all the men in them.

#1: …For because of such crimes [not clear if this means just blasphemies or homosexual practices as well] there are famines, earthquakes, and pestilences; wherefore we admonish men to abstain from the aforesaid unlawful acts, that they may not loose their souls. But if, after this our admonition any are found persisting in such offenses, first they render themselves unworthy of the mercy of God, and then they are subjugated to the punishment enjoined by law…………….

NOVEL 141

#1: For, instructed by the Holy Scriptures, we know that God brought a just judgment upon those who lived in Sodom, on account of this very madness of intercourse, so that to this very day that lands burns with inextinguishable fire……………………. (Source)

 

Benedictus Levita and the ''Pseudo-Isidore

Justinian's interpretation of the story of Sodom would be forgotten today (as it had been along with his law novellizations regarding homosexual behavior immediately after his death) had it not been made use of in fake Charlemagnian capitularies, fabricated by a Frankish monk using the pseudonym Benedictus Levita ("Benedict the Levite") around 850 CE. Benedict's three capitularies particularly dealing with Justinian's interpretation of the story of Sodom were:

''XXI. De diversis malorum flagitiis.'' ("No. 21: On manifold disgraceful wrongs")

''CXLIII. De sceleribus nefandis ob quae regna percussa sunt, ut penitus caveantur.'' ("No. 143: On sinful vices due to which empires have crumbled, so that we shall do our best to beware of them")

''CLX. De patratoribus diversorum malorum.'' ("No. 160: On the perpetrators of manifold evil deeds")

The first two documents warned that homosexuality imperiled the existence of the kingdom and the church. Because of sins against nature, cities had been consumed by heavenly fire and 40, 000 Benjamites put to sword.   The third document construed the Saracen invasion as God’s punishment for sin; it called for the Roman penalty of burning at the stake to be returned for cases of sodomy.   These fake capitularies turned ‘sodomites’ and other violators of Christian sexual moral behaviour into traitors who bring on invasions and threaten the survival of the Kingdom and no penalty could be too severe.

Benedict broadened the meaning for ''sodomy'' to all sexual acts not related to procreation that were therefore deemed ''counter nature'' (so for instance, even solitary masturbation and anal intercourse between a male and a female were covered), while among these he still emphasized all interpersonal acts not taking place between human men and women, especially homosexuality.

Benedict's rationale was that the punishment of such acts was in order to protect all Christianity from divine punishments such as natural disasters for carnal sins committed by individuals, but also for heresy, superstition and heathenry.

(Source 1) and (Source 2 pg 253 and 254)

So where did all of this eventually lead?  This rational lead to the Medieval Inquistion, herecticism and the hunting of witches.  This lead to genocide on a grand and tortuous level, all of this from one piece of scripture which was possibly manipulated in interpretation and by exclusion of the full text.

The use of the Charlemagnian capitularies were slow to take off.  One reason was because such capital punishment had never been heard of before in Roman Catholic Church history. As the Charlemagnian capitularies seemed to go against the humane Christian concept of forgiveness and mercy, it took several centuries before Benedict's demands for legal reform began to take tangible shape within larger ecclesiastical initiatives.

But in the end the humane Christian concept was cast aside and so began the Medieval Inquisition in 1184. A convenient target were the Cathars and Waldensians , and these ‘heretics’ were not only persecuted for alleged satanism but hence increasingly accused of fornication and sodomy.  The Cathars and Waldensians had their foundings in Christianity but they had a different point of view than the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) and they were seen as a threat.

Plague and the consequent decline in population was seen to be caused by homosexuality. Homosexuality, bestiality and ‘unnatural’ sexual intercourse were linked to starvation, pestilence, and other natural disasters.  By the mid 13^th century sodomites and heretics were both the target of the inquisition and seen as threats to Christian society.

 

Once the Cathars and the Waldensians where eliminated the RCC needed a new target and so began the Witch Hunts.  It has been argued that the witch hunts and the persecution of homosexuals was based on morality. However in the years when there were no plague witches and homosexual men were sent to trial less often than in years of plague.  Also the numbers sent to trial were far more for witches than homosexuals for example in non—plague years witches were tried in 46% of those years and in the same years homosexual men only 15%.  It appears that during the times of the witch hunts women were more likely to be the scapegoats as opposed to ‘sexual deviant’ men. (The Path of the Devil early: Modern Witch Hunts page 162 - 164)

A demonstration of the RCC link between heresy and sodomy is the term “buggery”.  Buggery is a corruption of bourrerie a reference to the Albigensians whose religious sect called the Bogomiles were said to have come from Bulgeria and this sect was persecuted by the RCC as a sect of heretics. (Literary Visions of Homosexuality pg 116).

Ever wondered where the word “fagot” a derogatory name given to homosexuals is derived from?  Fagot is the name of the collection of sticks that were piled up beneath and around the heretic’s feet and legs and then set on fire as the victim slowly burnt a slow agonising death.

Eymeric, who had been the inquisitor General in Catalonia wrote his manual in 1376.  It became a standard guide for procedure throughout the 16^th and 17^th centuries and made sweeping claims for papal authority. In questions of morals all people were subject to the judgement of the church and the power of the pope extended over all men.  It was said that the pope had the ability to punish any heathen violating natural law.  The proof according to Eymeric was God punishing the people of Sodom who sinned against natural law (Gen 19). He went on to say, “Now the judgments of our God are our examples!  Consequently why should the pope not proceed if he has the means, as God proceeds!”  This assertion claimed papal power of life and death over sodomites, not only in Christian Europe but in lands of other faith not yet discovered.  Eymeric justified the sanctions based on the story of Sodom. 

The papacy did not always see fit to exercise its theoretical right to try sodomites through its inquisitors.  Sometimes the task was delegated and other times it was not.  In Spain in1505 a decree was granted to try sodomites as part of the inquisition.  In 1524 a heresy charge was unable to stick to the grandson of a converted Jew whose name was Sancho, so the inquisition tribunal charged him with sodomy and sought permission from Pope Clement VII to try Sancho for sodomy and the permission was granted.  Three tribunals in different regions were given permission to charge sodomites.  Clement then associated sodomy with the Moors claiming the horrendous crime of sodomy had begun to spread through this group of people.  The precedent was well and truly set, there were campaigns against Jews, relapsed Moorish converts, and Protestant heretics and if they couldn’t try them for heresy they were tried for sodomy.  In 1571 the Saragrossa tribunal was told, “In sodomy trials prisoners should not be promised mercy.” The hint was understood and the arrests increased.  The charge of bestiality was also included as a charge with the same ramifications as sodomy.  The next year 12 men were burned at the stake simultaneously three for sodomy and the others for bestiality.  Going by Old Testament law the ‘guilty’ beasts were also burnt.  The Holy officers found it difficult to find enough wood to burn them all simultaneously.

In the period 1570 to 1630 execution for sodomy in the crown of Aragon outnumbered those for heresy. All told about 400 men were tried in three districts and 70 were executed for sodomy. The Spanish Inquisition was probably responsible for executing 100 men for sodomy in this region.  The civil courts also executed a similar number under laws inspired by religion.  In the 16^th and 17^th century in Spain it appears that the number of men burnt for homosexuality outnumbered the number of protestant heretics. The number of men who endured harsh treatment due to claims of sodomy exceeds those actually executed by about 4 or 5 times.  This period is one of the worst periods in RCC history.  The secular justice was also severe during this time, but the significant difference is how the RCC used the executions (Autos) as a form of calculated terror of its citizens.  Autos were huge spectaculars, with mass audiences almost like a sporting event.  To reinforce the real aim of these Autos we have the following extract, which was approved by Pope Gregory XIII, “We must remember that the chief purpose of the trial and the death sentence is not to save the soul of the accused but to promote the public good and to terrorize the people [ut alli terreantyr]” From 1540 to 1700 there were 44, 000 trials. (Homosexuality & Civilization pg 294 – 299)

 

The association of ''sodomy'' with hereticism, satanism, and witchcraft was supported by the Inquisition trials. The resulting infamity of sodomy motivated a continuing discrimination and persecution of homosexuals and sexual deviants in general long after the Medieval period had ended.

In Europe, Spain was the fiercest foe against homosexuality followed by, France and Italy and it was rare in England but laws did exist.  Countries such as Denmark, Russia, and Sweden were virtually lacking any law or discrimination against “sodomites’. Denmark had its first prosecution in 1744. In Sweden there were none before 1600 and very few after.  Russia was quite open about male/male relationships in the 1600 and 1700s, and did not have a sodomy law until 1832.

England lived in a state of denial, “Not in our country” and the name of the act was not even spoken.  In 1628 John Harris preached about the fall of Sodom before the House of Commons but made only the briefest hint of sodomy, Harris assured his listeners that the sin not fit to be named had been kept out of England by the hand of God.  Those familiar with the court of James I who had died three years earlier must have been smiling to themselves.  So for two centuries the denial of the unspoken sin would not be a cause for concern as it was un-British.  There were no records of sodomy trials in England in the 14^th and 15^th century.  In 1533 Henry VIII introduced the “buggery” law which was punishable by hanging. (Homosexuality & Civilisation pg 361 362)

The law was amended in 1828 to be a prison sentence and dropped as a crime if the act was between two consenting adults in 1967.

 

So that is the history of the early church persecution of homosexuals.  It is not nice, it is an abomination!  If we look at the verse from Ezekiel 16: 49 – 50

 

'Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me.

 

 

There are a number of reasons Sodom was destroyed the last one being they did detestable things which we can interpret as immoral sex acts based on the quote from Genesis.  However there are a number of interpretations which have said the main reason for Sodam’s destruction was due to their persistence in not supporting the poor and the needy.  Now even if that interpretation is not accurate, then we know for sure that Sodom was destroyed because they were arrogant, overfed, and selfish, didn’t help the poor and needy and did immoral acts.  Now I don’t see anyone being killed or persecuted for any of those other acts, just one.  In fact I will be so bold to say, very often we couldn’t care a less if people are not doing all of those other good deeds, the deeds which I believed was part of being a Christian.  But you know what given the amount of time and energy and hatred put into persecuting LGBT people and other minorities I obviously have got Christianity totally screwed up.  There is a passage 1 John 4: 7-21 titled “God’s Love and Ours”, well you could have fooled me that is what Christianity is all about.  Lately all I see is hatred, bigotry, selfishness, and people more worried about other people’s business than sorting their own crap out.

 

I am absolutely appalled that Christians quote that Sodom and Gomorrah quote in Genesis with only one reason and that is to discriminate against gay people, they NEVER also say, “Hey but wait there is more, there is a passage that actually explains why God destroyed Sodom.  Oh and by the way there are some references in Matthew as well, which have got nothing to do with sodomy.”

 

Today we don’t burn gay people at the stake, but we are just as discriminatory and we use our Bible as our weapon.

 

Some Churches are definitely homophobic despite what they say to the contrary.

 

Homosexual issues came in as number 4 in the top 10 list of concerns/news – Christian Post.

What are Christians so afraid of if they allow open gay people into their church or have a marriage ceremony.  Do we really believe just like in medieval times that famine, drought, hurricanes and climate change are ALL to do with giving people Gay Rights?

 

As for the Catholic Church well this is what it has to say in its “Catechism of the Catholic Church”:

2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

 

Well except for the ‘disordered’ part it sounds very nice, if only it were true.

 

So this is part of Pope Benedict XVI main message of Peace on the World Day of Peace:

 

"Whoever, even unknowingly, circumvents the institution of the family undermines peace in the entire community, national and international, since he weakens what is in effect the primary agency of peace," Benedict said Tuesday, quoting from his annual peace message to world leaders.

 

Yes well thank you for your inclusive message of peace and we know who one of the ‘whoever’s are and to say that people wanting the entitlement to have a same sex marriage or even legal rights for same sex de-facto relationships are a threat to world peace is an outrageous thing to say.  Two people want to have a loving committed relationship and they are a threat to world peace!

 

So as you can guess I am angry.  I am angry at the fact that a church used a piece of scripture to kill torture and terrorise countless people.  Yes that was the past but it is still happening just in a more covert way.  I am angry that I was never told about that piece of scripture in Ezekiel that should be noted in some way when the Sodom scripture in Genesis is read.  Yes I have read the entire Bible, twice in fact but not recently so I would have forgotten that important quote, but I have heard the Sodom quote more times than I could ever remember.  I am angry that people use that piece of scripture from Genesis and never say anymore except the hell and damnation and abomination part they like to add on.

 

This is what the younger generation are saying:

 

Young Americans today are more skeptical and resistant to Christianity than were people of the same age just a decade ago, claimed a new study this year.

Negative perceptions toward the Christian faith have outweighed the positive as a growing percentage of younger Americans associate with a faith outside Christianity.

Only 16 percent of non-Christians aged 16 to 29 years old said they have a "good impression" of Christianity, according to a report released in September by The Barna Group. A decade ago, the vast majority of Americans outside the Christian faith, including young people, felt favorably toward Christianity’s role in society.

Criticism, furthermore, was not limited to young people outside the Christian faith. Half of young churchgoers said they perceive Christianity to be judgmental, hypocritical and too political. Also, one-third said it was old-fashioned and out of touch with reality.

Among other common impressions, 23 percent of young non-Christians said "Christianity is changed from what it used to be" and "Christianity in today's society no longer looks like Jesus." Young born-again Christians were just as likely to say the same (22 percent).

Young Christians largely criticized the church, saying it has made homosexuality a "bigger sin" than anything else and that the church has not helped them apply the biblical teaching on homosexuality to their friendships with gays and lesbians.

"I think for a long time, the church just hasn't known how to talk about homosexuality," commented Scott Davis director of Exodus Youth, part of the evangelical ministry Exodus International that deals with the issue of homosexuality. "They've been very uncomfortable with the topic.”

"So when they do talk about it, they tend to talk about just the moral side of whether it's right or wrong without any real understanding of where people are coming from – so it comes across as very harsh," he explained.

AMEN

My last post was about a few things really, it was about what is real news and what is just ‘news’ designed to dumb us down and make us fight over the less important things, while the more important stuff is pushed along and we don’t even realise it.  I consider what is happening over in Burma real news and warrants attention.  I consider the Sally Field Emmy Awards ‘incident’ very incidental. 

 

Another point to the post was to disclose what I consider hypocrisy especially from some so called ‘Christians’.  It seems that the Christianity that I was brought up with and is still a part of me, is not the same Christianity that others consider Christianity. My view on Christianity is one of love, kindness, forgiveness, speaking out against injustice and when speaking out we do so in a reasonably respectful manner. I do not in my opinion see that it is our right to condemn people in God’s name; I believe that is God’s role.   I am not perfect and I do get angry and say things I regret out of anger, but I am generally the first person to admit such a thing and if tackled on it, I will at least consider my stand and refine it and apologise if required and hopefully learn something from it.  That is what life is about learning from mistakes, learning as much as possible and trying to do some good in the world. Christians are not perfect, nor are they meant to be, but I think that they do need to set themselves some reasonable standards of behaviour in this world.

 

I don’t watch the Emmy’s or the Oscars or the Grammy’s none of that stuff interests me, it is so superficial, so I would not have even known about Sally Field’s ‘incident’ at the Emmy’s had I not come across a post in the Catholic Group.  I was curious why the post was in the Catholic Vox group? Yes there was a reference to using God’s name in vain and the fact that Sally Fields had been the “Flying Nun” but the rest of the post was full of spite, anger and in my opinion a post just designed to tear some one apart. I felt disgusted that a post such as this was allowed to be in any Christian Group.  The name of the post was, “I’ve had it with Has-beens!”  I made some comments to the post and I didn’t get very far with my views, but that is fine I don’t expect people to agree with me.  I had hoped that the moderators of the group would have deleted it from the group, but I knew that they wouldn’t due to some in house politics.  I have posted to the group before about Christianity and have posted the same posts to other Christian Groups.  In the other Christian groups I have had some very good discussion and I was grateful and learnt a lot and the whole point was to get some open discussion.  However in the Catholic Vox group, I was virtually told to get out because I didn’t sound like a Catholic.  A Catholic voxer that I know posted to the group and was once told the same thing, “What are you doing here you don’t sound like you are Catholic?” There was also a reference that the Voxer did not use the word God enough.”

 

So my post from yesterday was partly in response to the post at the Catholic Vox group and I figured that if a hate filled piece (in my opinion) was allowed in the Catholic Vox group then why shouldn’t mine.  I had a feeling that it may get thrown out of the group, but in my opinion if my post was to be thrown out, then so should the other post.  Yes I was testing them, guilty as charged but I just wanted to test how hypocritical the group moderators were.  Well I came online this morning and guess what my post has been removed from the Catholic Vox Group and the other post titled, “I’ve had it with Has-beens!” is of course still there.

 

If that is the type of image that they wish to portray then so be it, not my problem but I really think it is a poor reflection on Christianity that such a piece is allowed to demonstrate to the world what Christianity is all about.  Atheists would love the post in question as it would give them so much material to work with.

 

If the writer of the post wants to do a character assassination on Sally Field, then fine it is none of my business.

 

If the writer wants to chastise Sally for saying the G-Bomb well I haven’t got a problem with that either, but a character assassination is not required to do such a thing and that is what I object to and that is why I do not believe the post should have been in the group.  If the post was not a character assassination then I would not have a problem with it being in the Catholic Vox group if its sole purpose was to chastise Sally about her use of the G-Bomb and how it offended the writer because he/she was a Catholic Christian.

 

I believe that Christians have a reputation to uphold and this sort of article just makes me sad.  But I could be wrong, may be I have the wrong idea about Christianity and that also makes me sad, but I don’t think I have got the wrong idea regarding many Christians.

The Catholic Vox group will be happy to learn that I shall be withdrawing my membership shortly after posting this post.

Have a safe and happy day to all :)