A gay gene?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Need answers

Well-Known Member
Feb 8, 2020
2,421
721
Ohio
✟19,636.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
They were still long past the age of marriage then before they chose to change their lifestyles.

Still doesn't change the fact that like the rest of the bible Romans 1:26-27 says nothing at all about female homosexuality or women with women, nor that anal sex is the natural use of the woman.
They were still long past the age of marriage then before they chose to change their lifestyles.
Long past? Im not sure thats correct. But whats your point anyway?

Still doesn't change the fact that like the rest of the bible Romans 1:26-27 says nothing at all about female homosexuality or women with women, nor that anal sex is the natural use of the woman.
Yes it does, you would need to be blind to miss it. It mentions nothing about anal sex, nothing.
 
Upvote 0

Mitty

Active Member
Mar 4, 2020
212
39
77
Victoria
✟19,812.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Long past? Im not sure thats correct. But whats your point anyway?

Yes it does, you would need to be blind to miss it. It mentions nothing about anal sex, nothing.
Nonsense. Where does Romans 1:26-27 say anything about female homosexuality or women with women.

And what were the "men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet" if it wasn't about anal sex, and do you think that they were just playing tiddly winks?
 
Upvote 0

Need answers

Well-Known Member
Feb 8, 2020
2,421
721
Ohio
✟19,636.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Nonsense. Where does Romans 1:26-27 say anything about female homosexuality or women with women.

And what were the "men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet" if it wasn't about anal sex, and do you think that they were just playing tiddly winks?
Its not referring to anal sex, and that is in no way clear that it is. It probably refers to God giving them over to homosexual passions, if i had to guess.

Nonsense. Where does Romans 1:26-27 say anything about female homosexuality or women with women.
This clearly refers to female homosexuality. But im done reiterating the same words. Have a nice day.

Romans 1:26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another.

"and were inflamed with lust for one another" this clearly describes homosexuality.
 
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
Its not referring to anal sex, and that is in no way clear that it is. It probably refers to God giving them over to homosexual passions, if i had to guess.

This clearly refers to female homosexuality. But im done reiterating the same words. Have a nice day.

Romans 1:26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another.

"and were inflamed with lust for one another" this clearly describes homosexuality.
Leviticus is just about men. But by the 1st Cent, Jews included both men and women. Rom 1 is a classic example of Jewish attacks on Gentiles. Because of idolatry their morals are degenerate. After normal sex is boring they look for more excitement. Whether this describes Christian gays can't be discussed in this forum. Note also how Rom 1 fits into the overall scheme of the first few chapters. Remember that Paul is not writing a tract on sexual ethics. He's dealing with claims of the Judaizers that Christians have to become Jewish. Part of this was based on Jewish stereotypes of Gentiles. Rom 1 quotes such a stereotype. Rom 2:2 quotes the summary in Rom 1:32 and rejects it. In the rest of Rom 2, Paul points out that many Gentiles have the Law written in their hearts. He then goes on in Rom 3 to say that Jews aren't perfect either.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: john23237
Upvote 0

Mitty

Active Member
Mar 4, 2020
212
39
77
Victoria
✟19,812.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Its not referring to anal sex, and that is in no way clear. It probably refers to God giving them over to homosexual passions, if i had to guess.
Why would a god give them over to "homosexual passions", and is that why they were playing tiddly winks with each other which Paul described as "vile" and "unseemly"?

This clearly refers to female homosexuality. But im done reiterating the same words. Have a nice day.

Romans 1:26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another.
Nonsense. Even Blind Freddy can see that Romans 1:26-27 CLEARLY DOES NOT SAY anything about female homosexuality or women with women, nor that anal sex is "the natural use of the woman" or that Paul described female genitalia as "vile" and "unseemly". You're just making that up. And the only person you are trying to convince with your obfuscation is just yourself, and given that the rest of the bible says nothing about female homosexuality or women with women either, apart from the relationship between Ruth and Naomi.

Romans 1:27 is obviously describing anal sex as being "vile" and "unseemly" in the same way that Leviticus 18 & 20 described anal sex as disgusting, as is eating oysters.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Mitty

Active Member
Mar 4, 2020
212
39
77
Victoria
✟19,812.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Leviticus is just about men. But by the 1st Cent, Jews included both men and women. Rom 1 is a classic example of Jewish attacks on Gentiles. Because of idolatry their morals are degenerate. After normal sex is boring they look for more excitement. Whether this describes Christian gays can't be discussed in this forum. Note also how Rom 1 fits into the overall scheme of the first few chapters. Remember that Paul is not writing a tract on sexual ethics. He's dealing with claims of the Judaizers that Christians have to become Jewish. Part of this was based on Jewish stereotypes of Gentiles. Rom 1 quotes such a stereotype. Rom 2:2 quotes the summary in Rom 1:32 and rejects it. In the rest of Rom 2, Paul points out that many Gentiles have the Law written in their hearts. He then goes on in Rom 3 to say that Jews aren't perfect either.
Leviticus also deals specifically with other aspects of female sexuality including inappropriate behavior with animals and adultery, but like Romans 1:26-27 says nothing about female homosexuality.
 
Upvote 0

Need answers

Well-Known Member
Feb 8, 2020
2,421
721
Ohio
✟19,636.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Leviticus is just about men. But by the 1st Cent, Jews included both men and women. Rom 1 is a classic example of Jewish attacks on Gentiles. Because of idolatry their morals are degenerate. After normal sex is boring they look for more excitement. Whether this describes Christian gays can't be discussed in this forum. Note also how Rom 1 fits into the overall scheme of the first few chapters. Remember that Paul is not writing a tract on sexual ethics. He's dealing with claims of the Judaizers that Christians have to become Jewish. Part of this was based on Jewish stereotypes of Gentiles. Rom 1 quotes such a stereotype. Rom 2:2 quotes the summary in Rom 1:32 and rejects it. In the rest of Rom 2, Paul points out that many Gentiles have the Law written in their hearts. He then goes on in Rom 3 to say that Jews aren't perfect either.
Paul seems to be speaking about hypocrisy. He also is in no way giving homosexuality a free pass. Its described by him as godlessness and wickedness, deserving of death because Gods wrath is upon them. Paul also refers to other sins as well. As far as the law in their hearts goes, they seem to still be following the law that God would give to the gentiles. As you can see, the sins Paul refers to in Romans 1 are universal, laws against it are given to both Jews and Gentiles.

Romans 1:18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness,

2 Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

2 Now we know that God’s judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. 3 So when you, a mere human being, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God’s judgment?

Romans 2:15 They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.)
 
Upvote 0

Mitty

Active Member
Mar 4, 2020
212
39
77
Victoria
✟19,812.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Of course not. But I think 26 is a pretty exact parallel to the first part of 27.
In other words the men were also having anal sex with their women as well as with other men, which Paul described as "vile" and "unseemly" and as not being "the natural use of the woman".
 
Upvote 0

Need answers

Well-Known Member
Feb 8, 2020
2,421
721
Ohio
✟19,636.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Romans 1:26 ... for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is [r]unnatural,

If this doesn't refer to female homosexuality what does it refer to?



27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.

The usual penalty is death, not anal sex.

32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.

 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Need answers

Well-Known Member
Feb 8, 2020
2,421
721
Ohio
✟19,636.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
In other words the men were also having anal sex with their women as well as with other men, which Paul described as "vile" and "unseemly" and as not being "the natural use of the woman".
So you would have me believe that only male homosexuality is unnatural? But female homosexuality is natural?
 
Upvote 0

Mitty

Active Member
Mar 4, 2020
212
39
77
Victoria
✟19,812.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Romans 1:26 ... for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is [r]unnatural,

If this doesn't refer to female homosexuality what does it refer to?



1:27 26 For this reason God gave them up to women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature.

The usual penalty is death, not anal sex.

32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.
Obviously it's referring to anal sex since it says nothing at all about female homosexuality or women with women "working that which is unseemly and receiving in themselves that error which was meet" from penetrative sex with other women. Nor does it say that anal sex is the "natural use of the woman".

And do you also believe that disobedient children should be executed (Romans 1:30-32) as commanded elsewhere in the bible?
 
Upvote 0

Mitty

Active Member
Mar 4, 2020
212
39
77
Victoria
✟19,812.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
So you would have me believe that only male homosexuality is unnatural? But female homosexuality is natural?
That's why the bible says nothing at all about female homosexuality since they do not have anal sex which Romans 1:26-27 describes as "vile" and "unseemly" and Leviticus 18 & 20 describe as disgusting, as does eating oysters. And nothing you say will ever convince my cat and I otherwise.
 
Upvote 0

Need answers

Well-Known Member
Feb 8, 2020
2,421
721
Ohio
✟19,636.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Obviously it's referring to anal sex since it says nothing at all about female homosexuality or women with women "working that which is unseemly and receiving in themselves that error which was meet" from penetrative sex with other women. Nor does it say that anal sex is the "natural use of the woman".

And do you also believe that disobedient children should be executed (Romans 1:30-32) as commanded elsewhere in the bible?

So you would have me believe that only male homosexuality is unnatural? But female homosexuality is natural?

And do you also believe that disobedient children should be executed (Romans 1:30-32) as commanded elsewhere in the bible?

I believe Paul in Romans may be referring to Spiritual death. Or perhaps even the physical death that we all as sinners face.
 
Upvote 0

Mitty

Active Member
Mar 4, 2020
212
39
77
Victoria
✟19,812.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
So you would have me believe that only male homosexuality is unnatural? But female homosexuality is natural?

I believe Paul in Romans may be referring to Spiritual death. Or perhaps even the physical death that we all as sinners face.
Either way, the bible still says nothing at all about female homosexuals since, unlike heterosexual women, they do not have anal sex which Paul described as "vile" and "unseemly". And nothing you say will convince my cat and I otherwise.

And it's your choice if you fantasize that Romans 1:26-27 says "women with women" or "female homosexuals" and that Paul therefore described female genitalia as "vile" and "unseemly" and why he never married.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Need answers

Well-Known Member
Feb 8, 2020
2,421
721
Ohio
✟19,636.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
That's why the bible says nothing at all about female homosexuality since they do not have anal sex which Romans 1:26-27 describes as "vile" and "unseemly" and Leviticus 18 & 20 describe as disgusting, as does eating oysters. And nothing you say will ever convince my cat and I otherwise.
Im not yet convinced that female homosexuality is natural. To say that Romans 1 refers only to anal sex is a bit of a stretch to me. I dont believe God created women to be with women.
 
Upvote 0

Need answers

Well-Known Member
Feb 8, 2020
2,421
721
Ohio
✟19,636.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Either way, the bible still says nothing at all about female homosexuals since, unlike heterosexual women, they do not have anal sex which Paul described as "vile" and "unseemly". And nothing you say will convince my cat and I otherwise.
Thats just your opinion, not fact.
 
Upvote 0

Mitty

Active Member
Mar 4, 2020
212
39
77
Victoria
✟19,812.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Im not yet convinced that female homosexuality is natural. To say that Romans 1 refers only to anal sex is a bit of a stretch to me.
That's your choice, but it still doesn't change the fact that Romans 1:26-27 says nothing about "women with women" or "female homosexuality".
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
I believe Paul in Romans may be referring to Spiritual death. Or perhaps even the physical death that we all as sinners face.
There's no sign that this phrase is intended non-literally. In theory OT laws allowed for death, although in practice it wouldn't actually be done. So saying they deserved death is technically accurate. As you know, i think Paul is quoting a stereotypical anti-Gentile Jewish position. He may have been pushing it slightly for effect.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.