Would Jesus Discriminate? Propaganda

It seems this picture is going around to try and trick people into thinking that Jesus/The Bible supports gay people? Gay marriage?

http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l82xfzR0Dt1qaoacbo1_500.jpg

They quote five passages, 4 of which I've looked up and know are definitely wrong. The 3 involving Jesus defines "Eunuch" as "Homosexual", and the other passage (Matt 8:5-13) claims that the paralyzed servant is somehow a Homosexual? It's pretty ridiculous. I couldn't find anything even remotely saying that Ruth Loved Naomi as Adam Loved Eve. Not sure about the alleged David Loved Jonathan "quote" though.

What are your thoughts on this? I think this is utter **** and that it's only meant to trick people into thinking the Catholic church is wrong on their stance on gay marriage.

It’s called “Queering the Bible”.

Elton John gave an interview to Parade magazine in which he described his cocaine use and past treatment of young men, and said he thought that Jesus Christ was a homosexual.

“I think Jesus was a compassionate, super-intelligent gay man who understood human problems,” John told the Sunday supplement.

Not long ago, there was a “Queer Rosary”.

See:

freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2350803/posts

This is a classic example of why people should NOT be allowed to interpret Scripture without the help of the Church. Because words can be twisted to mean whatever you want.

[quote="Baloo, post:1, topic:211305"]
It seems this picture is going around to try and trick people into thinking that Jesus/The Bible supports gay people? Gay marriage?

http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l82xfzR0Dt1qaoacbo1_500.jpg

They quote five passages, 4 of which I've looked up and know are definitely wrong. The 3 involving Jesus defines "Eunuch" as "Homosexual", and the other passage (Matt 8:5-13) claims that the paralyzed servant is somehow a Homosexual? It's pretty ridiculous. I couldn't find anything even remotely saying that Ruth Loved Naomi as Adam Loved Eve. Not sure about the alleged David Loved Jonathan "quote" though.

What are your thoughts on this? I think this is utter **** and that it's only meant to trick people into thinking the Catholic church is wrong on their stance on gay marriage.

[/quote]

The ones who wrote this are Christophobic. Rom 1:21-32 describes those who become reprobates. When you continue in sin, you come to a point where you cannot get out of the sin. The problem with homosexuality today is that the homosexuals have made homosexuality and the person one and the same thing. Homosexuality is a sin and not the person. We all have tendencies to sin and must fight it. The first step is to acknowledge the sin. I agree that this email going around is nothing but propaganda.

Not surprising that the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah are not on their banner.

Perhaps someone should construct another email banner with all the verses that preach against sex acts of same sex attracted persons.

[quote="James224, post:4, topic:211305"]
The ones who wrote this are Christophobic. Rom 1:21-32 describes those who become reprobates. When you continue in sin, you come to a point where you cannot get out of the sin. The problem with homosexuality today is that the homosexuals have made homosexuality and the person one and the same thing. Homosexuality is a sin and not the person. We all have tendencies to sin and must fight it. The first step is to acknowledge the sin. I agree that this email going around is nothing but propaganda.

[/quote]

No, the tendency of Homosexuality isn't a sin. However, gay marriage and sex between two men or two women is.

[quote="Baloo, post:6, topic:211305"]
No, the tendency of Homosexuality isn't a sin. However, gay marriage and sex between two men or two women is.

[/quote]

I didn't mean the tendency of homosexuality is a sin. that's concupiscience. What I meant is that any person has tendencies to sin and we must fight it. that's all. I agree with you that acting on these tendencies or temptations is a sin.

That propaganda just goes to show how the term “discriminate” has been perverted (typical tactic the Leftists and the Fascists like to use, cf. the Nazis calling the Shoah “deportation to the East”): on the most basic level, discrimination involves discernment. Like, you have to discriminate between rotting produce and fresh; between poisonous mushrooms and edible; between junky car brands and trustworthy ones, etc. Jesus seems to have “discriminated” quite a bit when he dealt with the Pharisees, even going so far as to call them “sons of Satan” (nay, even Peter at one point, He rebuked with, “Get behind me, Satan!”).

As for the abuse of the Jonathan and David verse: I used to know a Green Beret who served through some really tough assignments in Nam. He was a thoroughly heterosexual womanizer, but even in the late 80’s, when we conversed, he was still pining away for the “one of a kind” comradery he had experienced with his fellow G.B.‘s during the ordeal in Nam. The Sodomites’ perversion of that Biblical verse simply goes to show their own limited range of human emotion; it’s a bit like men who (in a relationship with a woman) can’t understand any kind of physical contact that’s not sexual in nature.

(Footnote: as for the comment that “this just goes to show how much we need the church as an interpreter,” uh, no: Scripture interprets Scripture. Any regenerate—meaning Spirit-indwelt—Christian who’s well-versed in the Word would know that the Bible militates against perversion of any kind. Leviticus and Deuteronomy are about as clear on it as you can get, and of course Paul reiterates some of that in shorthand form.)

[quote="nov8r, post:8, topic:211305"]

(Footnote: as for the comment that "this just goes to show how much we need the church as an interpreter," uh, no: Scripture interprets Scripture. Any regenerate---meaning Spirit-indwelt---Christian who's well-versed in the Word would know that the Bible militates against perversion of any kind. Leviticus and Deuteronomy are about as clear on it as you can get, and of course Paul reiterates some of that in shorthand form.)

[/quote]

There are those who disagree with you. I've had people argue that the verses in Deuteronomy do NOT mean what we perceive them to mean. :)

And these are people who know the Bible inside and out. In fact, the more they study the better they are perverting the Word.

[quote="Barbkw, post:5, topic:211305"]
Not surprising that the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah are not on their banner.

[/quote]

POW! Right in the kisser:D

Ha ha ha ha ha!

They should reread Matt 19! That whole passage is about people who are sexually abstinent their entire lives "for the sake of the Kingdom"! If the passage is (in some bizarre interpretation) about homosexuals, then Jesus's message for gays is very, very clear: no gay sex! EVER!

If this is the best they can come up with, I feel suddenly much more secure in my arguments.

:D

From the Queering the Rosary website:

"I always prefered the Furious Mysteries:

1.) God destroys Sodom and Gomorrah.
2.) Joshua blasts down the walls of Jericho with a trumpet.
3.) Sampson pulls down the idol temple.
4.) Jesus drives the money changers from the temple with a whip.
5.) St. Peter rebukes Ananias and Saphira and they fall dead."

I love all of you, but I simply can’t agree with your interpretation of the Sacred Scriptures. The biblical “arguments” against Homosexuality are only found in the Old Testament, specifically Leviticus and Deutoronomy. Tell me, do any of you abstain from the eating of shrimp or pork? Or do you condemn those who commit adultery or work on the Sabbath to death by stoning? No, of course not. And yes, I know what the Church says in regards to Homosexuality, but you have to admit that the Church has been wrong before. Blessed Pope John Paul II actually had to submit public apologies for the Church’s past sins (i.e. anti-Semitism, the persecution of Galileo, the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, &c.). Does this mean that the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church founded by Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is a sinner? No. The Church is holy, but the people in it are imperfect sinners, including the Pope (which he admits). Corrupt and sinful HUMANS within the Church have let their biases and prejudices influence their reading of Scripture. And about Sodom and Gomorrah. Where in the Bible does it claim that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed for Homosexuality? There is no place where the Sacred Scripture claims this. The prophet Ezekiel said (to the affect) that “your sister Sodom” was destroyed for sexual sins such as adultery and incest, not Homosexual acts. Secondly, that isn’t even the worst thing the prophet Ezekiel said Sodom was destroyed for. He said the worst thing they did was "they did not give a hand to the poor and needy.

I am in a loving relationship with my husband Shyree. We are both devout Christians and Catholics. He is my soulmate. And we firmly believe that God is in the centre of our marriage, just like in any marriage between two loving individuals. I cannot accept that the God in whose image and likeness we are created would create me a gay man and then expect me to live a lonely, loveless life just because of who I am. Our Catechism clearly states that LGBTQ people should be given, as is our and everyone elses right as children of the Lord God, the utmost Respect, Compassion, Sensitivity and LOVE. Alot of good and devout Catholics support of groups such as Equally Blessed, DignityUSA, or New Ways Ministry. My Church already supports gays and lesbians with love, why not go one step further, and let us be who we are?
God bless all of you! Amen.

By the way, this is really the only thing I disagree with Church with. I am pro-life for instance. I believe everything the Church says, except in regards to Homosexuality.

I also disagree in regards with the Church’s teachings on masturbation. But that isn’t really a social justice issue unlike gay rights. By the way, I am an apologist.

And yet in other places in the Bible it clearly says that homosexual acts are sinful and that marriage is only between a man and a woman. Seems like a contradiction if what they claim is true. Since what I mention is more directly stated, their conclusions must be false and a misinterpretation.

Actually, homosexuality is also considered sinful in the new testament (Romans 1:26-27 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 are two that state it more explicitly). And marriage is again affirmed as between a man and a woman in a number of places.

The Bible also says you can marry 700 women, as King Solomon did. What’s your point?

King Solomon, while he was given wisdom, abused his wisdom for sin. He physically could, but what he did was wrong. Just because the Bible says he did it, doesn’t make it okay.

Also, God didn’t make you as a gay man. That happened as a result of sin having entered the world.

You can have loving relationships without sex being involved.

Romans 1:26-27 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 do not condemn Homosexual acts between two loving individuals. The original translation of 1 Corinthians does not say Homosexuals. The word didn’t even exist. He used the word “effeminate” translated into meaning soft, and without resolve. Romans doesn’t condemn those men and women for Homosexuality, it condemns the for having sex not for love, but for lust.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.