Jump to content
Follow Gaga Daily on Telegram
other

Pope Francis: “Being homosexual is not a crime”


noa234

Featured Posts

This is about as strong a supportive statement as could be hoped for from a pope.

5 hours ago, Lukas96 said:

I was agreeing with you though, just adding info to show how the doctrine is ridiculous and unfounded.

The first time the word "homosexual" appears in a translation of the bible is 1946 in the RSV version, prior to that the word “arsenokoitai”, which is the one translated a homosexual, was translated as "pedophile" or "child molester" way back in the 1800s... so yeah, the bible never really mentioned homosexuality.

It's much more than just that one reference.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_and_homosexuality

People quibble over each instance, but I think for the most part they're kidding themselves, trying to rescue something (that is, the bible) that doesn't deserve to be rescued.

The doctrine IS ridiculous and unfounded, because the bible is ridiculous and unfounded.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 38
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 minute ago, ThisGuyTony said:

Didn’t the Pope d*e a few weeks ago?? :awkney: 

girl that was the old one :air:

mother, what must i do?
Link to post
Share on other sites

ThisGuyTony
1 minute ago, NATAH said:

girl that was the old one :air:

The Pope before him? :emma: I thought it was the current one :air: 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ThisGuyTony said:

The Pope before him? :emma: I thought it was the current one :air: 

yes :air:

i think :selena:

mother, what must i do?
Link to post
Share on other sites

skaxboy

Eating shellfish is not a crime but is a sin. 
 

Wearing mixed fabrics is not a crime but is a sin. 
 

I’m cool with that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Nemo said:

This is about as strong a supportive statement as could be hoped for from a pope.

It's much more than just that one reference.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_and_homosexuality

People quibble over each instance, but I think for the most part they're kidding themselves, trying to rescue something (that is, the bible) that doesn't deserve to be rescued.

The doctrine IS ridiculous and unfounded, because the bible is ridiculous and unfounded.

I don't think we're trying to rescue anything, but to criticize it's manipulation by the church itself

Link to post
Share on other sites

This isn't even theologically "correct": the Bible translators purposely translated the word "pederasts" (those who initiate children sexually, such as in the Ancient Greek and Roman empires) for "sodomites" in order to hide the structural pedophilia of the Church. I'm not sure when this happened, but I think it happened in the Middle Ages. Also, in the apocryphal gospels, you can read Philip saying "although they didn't procreate, they were allowed in Heaven's gates", which theology students interpret as referring to homosexuality.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 1/25/2023 at 6:54 PM, ThisGuyTony said:

The Pope before him? :emma: I thought it was the current one :air: 

Joseph Ratzinger, AKA Benedict the 16th, is the one who recently died. Known as a reactionary, he was pope from 2005-2013, at which point he retired -- the first pope to leave the office alive in about 600 years.

Jorge Bergoglio, AKA Francis, has been the pope since Ratzinger retired, and remains so. He's considered progressive, as popes go.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...