Zone1 homosexuality and its punishment -- by Pope SAINT Pius V

full disclosure: I didn't read the whole post but anyhow, based on a few sentences

That poster (post above this one) must be a liberal

They are always trying to change the obvious meanings of words so as to further their sick agenda
 
Homosexuality is such a divisive issue in US politics now
It actually wasn't until the left demanded that everyone else celebrate homosexual behavior.

LGBT propaganda.jpeg
 
What does this mean? When you judge homosexuals, assuming they are guilty of a worse sin than any sin you may have committed in your lifetime, without any knowledge of what is in their hearts/minds - then you too will be judged according to the way you judge homosexuals.
The sad fact is that we are ALL slaves to sin as long as we are in the flesh.
 
full disclosure: I didn't read the whole post but anyhow, based on a few sentences

That poster (post above this one) must be a liberal

They are always trying to change the obvious meanings of words so as to further their sick agenda
You can quote me, I don't bite. lol

No, not a "liberal". Independent/Non Partisan politically. And no, I wasn't "changing" the meaning of the word sodomy. During Biblical times, the word came from the ancient city of Sodom. (Where people were supposedly being raped, among other things)

Personally, I don't judge others because I don't know what is in a person's heart. And Jesus stated, "Do not judge unless you want to be judged by the same measure you judge others". (Matthew 7)

Jesus had tax collectors and prostitutes among his followers. When a group of men wanted to stone a woman (they accused her of adultery) - Jesus said to the men, "He who is without sin, let him cast the first stone." (John 8:7) No one threw a stone and the woman was spared. So if Jesus did not judge and prevented a prostitute from being stoned to death 2000 years ago - who are we to judge others in modern times?
 
You can quote me, I don't bite. lol

No, not a "liberal". Independent/Non Partisan politically. And no, I wasn't "changing" the meaning of the word sodomy. During Biblical times, the word came from the ancient city of Sodom. (Where people were supposedly being raped, among other things)

Personally, I don't judge others because I don't know what is in a person's heart. And Jesus stated, "Do not judge unless you want to be judged by the same measure you judge others". (Matthew 7)

Jesus had tax collectors and prostitutes among his followers. When a group of men wanted to stone a woman (they accused her of adultery) - Jesus said to the men, "He who is without sin, let him cast the first stone." (John 8:7) No one threw a stone and the woman was spared. So if Jesus did not judge and prevented a prostitute from being stoned to death 2000 years ago - who are we to judge others in modern times?
Truth doesn't change so why do you bring up "modern times"? What... ? Is sin different now? Is human nature different now? No, there is nothing new under the sun, as the Word says.

interesting that you go by "modern times" when you conveniently leave out what Jesus said to that woman caught in adultery (not prostitution):

SIN NO MORE

(That is what we need to say to the world and to ourselves: SIN NO MORE)
 
wo
Truth doesn't change so why do you bring up "modern times"? What... ? Is sin different now? Is human nature different now? No, there is nothing new under the sun, as the Word says.

interesting that you go by "modern times" when you conveniently leave out what Jesus said to that woman caught in adultery (not prostitution):

SIN NO MORE

(That is what we need to say to the world and to ourselves: SIN NO MORE)
Is sin and human nature different now vs 2000 years ago? 2000 years ago it was "acceptable" to "own" slaves. Is it acceptable now? Was it a sin then? Is it a sin now?

2000 years ago it was acceptable to stone your wife if she committed adultery. Was it a sin then? Is it a sin now?

When Jesus spoke about "sinning no more" was it not after he made it known that even "the righteous" sin? (No one threw a stone).
 
Is sin and human nature different now vs 2000 years ago? 2000 years ago it was "acceptable" to "own" slaves. Is it acceptable now? Was it a sin then? Is it a sin now?

2000 years ago it was acceptable to stone your wife if she committed adultery. Was it a sin then? Is it a sin now?

When Jesus spoke about "sinning no more" was it not after he made it known that even "the righteous" sin? (No one threw a stone).
The best question to consider is whether it is in the best interest of both the individual(s) and the society to endorse the particular action/behavior.
 
The best question to consider is whether it is in the best interest of both the individual(s) and the society to endorse the particular action/behavior.
What happens if the "best interest of both the individual and the society" are contrary to Biblical and/or Church teaching?

For example, birth control (primarily condoms) are widely accepted (and could be considered "the best interest") by individuals and society (to prevent the spread of disease, among other things) - is birth control a sin?

Catholics (Christians) are instructed not to have premarital sex. How realistic is that? How many Christians are virgins until they are married?
 
For example, birth control (primarily condoms) are widely accepted (and could be considered "the best interest") by individuals and society (to prevent the spread of disease, among other things) - is birth control a sin?
Do you know why Pope Paul VI couldn't (after many prayerful days) approve artificial birth control? He saw further down the slope...abortion.
 
Catholics (Christians) are instructed not to have premarital sex. How realistic is that? How many Christians are virgins until they are married?
Yet most of society was able to eschew premarital sex until fairly recently. There is a difference between can't do it and won't do it.
 
so in other words, if someone does something and especially if many people do it, it is OK?
It seems that to take someone's mind of one form of bad behavior, simply point to another form of bad behavior. I wonder if we could all agree to correct just one form of bad behavior and see where that leads us...
 
It seems that to take someone's mind of one form of bad behavior, simply point to another form of bad behavior. I wonder if we could all agree to correct just one form of bad behavior and see where that leads us...
Few seem to know the difference these days between bad and good behavior. Perversity is now accepted.

really sad considering we all used to more/less agree on such. Watch an episode of the old Andy Griffith show, all you who think things haven't changed as dramatically as we Christians claim. I dare you to say that things are better now in society
 

RE this material, I say

This is the TRUE Catholic Church-- as opposed to the fake one currently in the Vatican (which I do not call a "church" at all). The Vatican was highjacked 65 years ago and we have not had a valid pope since. They have all been usurpers and heretics (yes JPII also). But this site is about a true pope, a true saint... (fake popes, on the other hand, cannot canonize anyone). Pius V came along at a time in history when there weren't a lot of lawless, liberal... possessed... (you name it)... folks trying to steal the Vatican and deceive everyone. You have to go down to the 10th paragraph


From the site RE homosexuality being a crime:


In the 16th century, Pope St. Pius V issued a decree regarding “that horrible crime” of sodomy. Here is the full text in English translation:

The church was wrong.
 

Forum List

Back
Top