A re-examination of nothing

[savedandhappy1]

But it did come up and you just mentioned it. When Jesus introduced a new kind of "eunuch" -- the celibate for the Gospel's sake -- He also mentioned two others.

The Greek language only knows one kind of eunuch, a man who has been "unmanned." But the Semitic language and culture used the Hebrew word saris and its cognates in Aramaic, Arabic, etc. (translated into Greek as eunouchus) to designate two different types of men.

One was a eunuch (physically unmanned), and the other was a person who was capable of fathering children, but who (according to the stereotypes of the day) preferred to spend his time seducing comely young men. Just like today, the rabbis whose commentaries are preserved in the Talmud argued over whether this kind of saris could be cured.

The Bible indirectly aknowledges the existence of this second type of saris in two other passages. In Deut 23:1 a eunuch is forbidden to worship in the Tabernacle (and by extension, in the Temple). In this verse, Moses does not simply forbid a saris from entering, but specifies that it is a person with "crushed stones" or with his "privy member" cut off. There is no other verse in the entire Bible which is as graphic in its description of the male anatomy.

And in the story of Phillip and the Ethiopian treasurer, (Acts 8), the "eunuch" was returning from a trip to Jerusalem to worship in the Temple, so he could not have had "crushed stones" or a missing "privy member." He must have been the other kind of saris.

I mentioned eunuchs, plural and said different kinds, so not sure your point, sorry.

 

[savedandhappy1]

Why do you persist in spreading propaganda against gay people? That's not a loving thing to do. Jesus would not do that.

Your post is offensive, because it's just aimed at attacking us, nothing more.

So homosexuals can state that suicide rates are high because of abuse, condemnation, etc., but if someone shows information about studies that say different it is spreading propaganda and non-loving?

If you consider it offensive report it.

Not sure why a study about homosexual suicide is attacking, just because it differs from what was stated by davidjy.

davidjy brought up the subject, as I showed by posting his quote. So me posted an answer to that post with a study is not attacking, and if you find it offensive you might want to take that up with the doctors who did and published the study.

Here is the report from a site that has no reason to lie.
http://archpsyc.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/58/1/85

 

[Floatingaxe]

Why do you persist in spreading propaganda against gay people? That's not a loving thing to do. Jesus would not do that.

Your post is offensive, because it's just aimed at attacking us, nothing more.

There is no attack there. It is simply a post that questions the validity of a stance that homosexuality poses no harm to anyone--which is really a lie.

The propoganda is that homosexuality is perfectly harmless to all.

 

[savedandhappy1]

Then if you question the findings, why do you bring them up?

You really don't need to go out of your way to attack other people simply because you don't like us.

What would you say if I started pointing out the studies that show higher rates of divorce among conservative Christians than among other Americans? If I were to bring this up out of the blue, wouldn't you think I was simply attacking conservative Christians for no reason?

That's what it's like to have you slander gay people in this way. It's offensive, and it's not loving. It's not what Jesus would do.

Why can't you just allow gay people to live our lives without our having to defend ourselves all the time? It gets very tiring to be attacked constantly by people who claim to love us.

I don't question the findings, I said some here would because of the site I got the information from.

http://archpsyc.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/58/1/85

Here is the site the information was gotten from, which would have no reason to lie.

The truth isn't slandering it is what it is, the truth.

Now if you have information that the findings given in Arch Gen Psychiatry are false then post them.

I didn't bring anything up out of the blue but was responding to a post.

 

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

Regardless of whether it bes 'harmful' or NOT the fact remains: persecuting someone for being gay will not make them suddenly stop being gay. They cannot stop being who they bes any more than you can stop being what you bes. Why can we not all strive to accept one another and be supportive and nurturing to one another? Why must we all try to force one another into some MOLD for our own comfort zone? That bes SELFISH at the core and SELFISHness bes WRONG -- selfishness bes the antithesis of love.

 

[Ohioprof]

So homosexuals can state that suicide rates are high because of abuse, condemnation, etc., but if someone shows information about studies that say different it is spreading propaganda and non-loving?

If you consider it offensive report it.

Not sure why a study about homosexual suicide is attacking, just because it differs from what was stated by davidjy.

davidjy brought up the subject, as I showed by posting his quote. So me posted an answer to that post with a study is not attacking, and if you find it offensive you might want to take that up with the doctors who did and published the study.

Here is the report from a site that has no reason to lie.
http://archpsyc.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/58/1/85

You are the one who decided to talk on and on about the alleged mental health problems of gay people, suggesting, with no clear reason, that gay people suffer from mental health issues not because of how we are treated, but for some other reason that you failed to state.

The article to which you link simply says that gay people, according to the study, are at greater risk for depressive disorders and substance abuse than are heterosexuals. It does not say why. The article to which you link does not challenge the idea that gay people suffer more from depressive disorders because of how we are treated.

Maybe if people stopped attacking gay people and let us live our lives as full human beings, our risk of depressive disorders and risk of substance abuse would lessen.

If you want to get an idea about why gay people might get depressed, try living for a year as an openly gay person. That doesn't mean you have to go out and have sex. Just tell people around you that you are gay, and see how people treat you. Try walking down the street holding hands with a woman, and see what happens to you. Then, after a year, come back and report on this experience. I have no doubt it would be eye opening for you.

Posts can be offensive without violating the rules of the forums. Your post was offensive, because it was obviously aimed at nothing more than attacking gay people. You showed no compassion for gay people in your post whatsoever. It's not even clear why you think gay people may be at higher risk for depression, if you question the argument that it's because of how we are treated. At any rate, you seem to have the desire to attack gay people, not to show the love of Jesus to all.

 

[Chaplain David]

Why do you persist in spreading propaganda against gay people? That's not a loving thing to do. Jesus would not do that.

Your post is offensive, because it's just aimed at attacking us, nothing more.

The post referenced above is one made by floating axe but I have an answer I'd like to share. I believe that the accusations made above could be reversed and directed at the homosexuals in this forum and I'll give an example.

If you substitute the words "denying God's written word, the Holy Bible" for several of the words in the first accusation it reads:

Why do you persist in denying God's written word, the Holy Bible? That's not a loving thing to do. Jesus would not do that.

I do not believe floating axes motives are based on attacking homosexuals. Rather, they are grounded in what she believes is stated in Scripture regarding homosexual sin which is law to many of us.

 

[Ohioprof]

There is no attack there. It is simply a post that questions the validity of a stance that homosexuality poses no harm to anyone--which is really a lie.

The propoganda is that homosexuality is perfectly harmless to all.

The study to which the other poster linked does NOT say that homosexuality causes people to have mental health issues. The study says that gay people are at somewhat greater risk of mental health issues. The study does NOT say why.

Most of us have told you that we did not choose to be gay. We just are gay. Gay people are frequently the targets of hatred, denigration, hate crimes, exclusion from some churches and from other arenas in society. Gay people, unlike members of racial or ethnic minority groups, are often kicked out of our own families, rejected by our parents. In the past, the only place that gay people had to go to meet was the bars, which of course tended to lead to greater levels of drinking and alcoholism. It only makes sense that we would suffer from greater difficulties in coping given the level of hostility and denigration and exclusion aimed at us. I am not suprised that the rates of depression and substance abuse are higher among gay people, and I am quite sure that it results from how gay people have been treated in the society.

This has been changing, as our society has slowly begun to accept gay people and people have more and more come to treat us with dignity rather than denigrating us. I would like to see follow-up studies over time on the mental health of gay people. I predict that the differences between gay people and heterosexuals will probably lessen over time, as gay people are more accepted and welcomed in the society rather than denigrated and excluded. I know that I used to feel completely excluded, an outsider in the world where I grew up. That has changed so much, it's astonishing to me. But it has not changed for everyone. I have been lucky, because I am in a profession that accepts gay people, and I have a church community that accepts and welcomes gay people, and my dad, in the years before he died, accepted me. I have also experienced less denigration and exclusion in recent years because I have been single, and people who don't know me mostly assume that I am heterosexual, as I am a mother. People treat those they believe to be heterosexual much better than they treat gay people, I have discovered from personal experience.

For posters here to turn around and use the data about the depression suffered by many gay people as a weapon against us is just exacerbating the problem. It's piling on a minority group that has suffered enough at the hands of people who hate us or who dislike us or who refuse to accept us.

So back off, please, and quit attacking gay people. It's not what Jesus would do.

 

[savedandhappy1]

Regardless of whether it bes 'harmful' or NOT the fact remains: persecuting someone for being gay will not make them suddenly stop being gay. They cannot stop being who they bes any more than you can stop being what you bes. Why can we not all strive to accept one another and be supportive and nurturing to one another? Why must we all try to force one another into some MOLD for our own comfort zone? That bes SELFISH at the core and SELFISHness bes WRONG -- selfishness bes the antithesis of love.

There is no where in the Bible where Jesus supported or nurtured sin, so I won't either.

Not supporting a sin is different then not supporting a person. If a person isn't a person anymore without their sexual desires then...................well to me that is sad.

I am not who I am because of my sexual passions. I will not cease to be if I no longer have sexual desires, if that was true then when I get to heaven I will be no more. We see in the Bible that in heaven we will no longer be given in marriage or be married, so does that mean I will no longer be?

 

[Floatingaxe]

The post referenced above is one made by floating axe but I have an answer I'd like to share. I believe that the accusations made above could be reversed and directed at the homosexuals in this forum and I'll give an example.

If you substitute the words "denying God's written word, the Holy Bible" for several of the words in the first accusation it reads:

Why do you persist in denying God's written word, the Holy Bible? That's not a loving thing to do. Jesus would not do that.

I do not believe floating axes motives are based on attacking homosexuals. Rather, they are grounded in what she believes is stated in Scripture regarding homosexual sin which is law to many of us.

Actually, it is savedandhappy1 who is being charged with presenting propaganda, sacerdote.


Yes, you are correct. Our motives are only to present the truth of Scripture--God's message to humanity. It is law for everyone, but not everyone accepts it as law, and so they violate it...which is why in scripture, homosexuals are referred to as "homosexual offenders."

 

[Chaplain David]

The concept of satan is just a concept, in my view. There is no actual satan. The capacity for doing evil is simply part of human nature. There is no satan causing humans to do evil.

And being gay, which is how God made some of us, and loving our spouses is NOT doing evil. It has nothing to do with any concept of "satan." People are simply not all the same, and that's what makes the world interesting and beautiful. Some people are gay, some people are bisexual, most people are heterosexual. It's God's expression through a diverse creation. That's what I think.

Except that not only the concept, but the reality of satan is well grounded in Scripture. Didn't you say that you didn't use the Holy Bible or that it wasn't true or something like that? Can't remember. Maybe the post is in the archives.

 

[Ohioprof]

The post referenced above is one made by floating axe but I have an answer I'd like to share. I believe that the accusations made above could be reversed and directed at the homosexuals in this forum and I'll give an example.

If you substitute the words "denying God's written word, the Holy Bible" for several of the words in the first accusation it reads:

Why do you persist in denying God's written word, the Holy Bible? That's not a loving thing to do. Jesus would not do that.

I do not believe floating axes motives are based on attacking homosexuals. Rather, they are grounded in what she believes is stated in Scripture regarding homosexual sin which is law to many of us.

Oh, nonsense. Have you read what some other posters here have written about gay people? No one has said anything like that about Christians. And no one has said anything like that about the Bible either, which is a book and not a person anyway.

Your fellow Christians, some of whom are gay, have expressed different interpretations of and understandings of the Bible. Just because their interpretations differ from your interpretations does not mean that they are attacks on the Bible. They are simply different understandings.

Discussing a book and disagreeing about the nature of a book is not the same as attacking people. You personally have not attacked gay people, but some other posters here clearly have, in some of the most inflammatory language one can imagine. To defend those attacks against gay people is, frankly, unconscionable.

In case you haven't noticed the attack posts aimed at gay people, I will point them out to you in the future.

 

[Chaplain David]

Actually, it is savedandhappy1 who is being charged with presenting propaganda, sacerdote.


Yes, you are correct. Our motives are only to present the truth of Scripture--God's message to humanity. It is law for everyone, but not everyone accepts it as law, and so they violate it...which is why in scripture, homosexuals are referred to as "homosexual offenders."

No kidding, well there's just about how many millions of believers standing with her then? I've been writing a lot this morning and got you confused. Sorry. Somebody was denying that satan existed earlier and I had to address that.

 

[Ohioprof]

There is no where in the Bible where Jesus supported or nurtured sin, so I won't either.

Not supporting a sin is different then not supporting a person. If a person isn't a person anymore without their sexual desires then...................well to me that is sad.

I am not who I am because of my sexual passions. I will not cease to be if I no longer have sexual desires, if that was true then when I get to heaven I will be no more. We see in the Bible that in heaven we will no longer be given in marriage or be married, so does that mean I will no longer be?

Being gay is not about "sexual desires." It is about whom we love and choose to marry, based on how God made some of us.

Being gay is just a characteristic of some people. You have the characteristic of being heterosexual, apparently. I have the characteristic of being gay. I am no more defined by or driven by "sexual desires" than you are. I do insist that I and other gay people be treated as equals in the society and that our marriages be honored and recognized in the civil society. If churches refuse to recognize our marriages, that is up to them. But we will continue our struggle for equal treatment under the law and the equal right to civil marriage, as distinct from religious marriage.

 

[Ohioprof]

No kidding, well there's just about how many millions of believers standing with her then? I've been writing a lot this morning and got you confused. Sorry. Somebody was denying that satan existed earlier and I had to address that.

I do not believe that satan exists, except as a concept. We all have the potential to do evil in the world, and we all have the potential to do good. There is no outside entity called "satan."

 

[Ohioprof]

Except that not only the concept, but the reality of satan is well grounded in Scripture. Didn't you say that you didn't use the Holy Bible or that it wasn't true or something like that? Can't remember. Maybe the post is in the archives.

I have said that I do not regard the Bible as the word of God, but rather as a useful historical source. But this has nothing to do with the topic of homosexuality.

 

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

There is no where in the Bible where Jesus supported or nurtured sin, so I won't either.

You do not bother to take time to read properly, do you. Did Moriah say "support and nurture sin"? No, Moriah did not. MORIAH's ACTUAL FREAKING WORDS BES THIS: support and nurture ONE ANOTHER.

Do NOT ... it repeats:

DO ***NOT***
ever
under ANY circumstances WHATSOEVER
presume to make it appear Moriah bes saying something it bes NOT SAYING. THAT BES A LIE AND THEM WHAT DOES THAT BES LIARS. END OF ISSUE.

The rest of your STRAW MAN RED HERRING NONSENSE bes IGNORED. When you bes ready responding to MORIAH what MORIAH bes talksy about THEN answer Moriah. Do not EVER presume to pull that nonsense AGAIN. This goes for every one of you mortals reading this as well on this and EVERY other thread, it WILL be addressed and you WILL be called out on it so do not waste YOUR time OR MORIAH's even ATTEMPTING those games. You want to disagree? FINE, YOU BES ENTITLED -- just make certain you bes disagreeing with WHAT IT ACTUALLY SAYS NOT SOME TWISTED MISREPRESENTATIONAL **LIE** invented on the fly!!!!!!!

 

[savedandhappy1]

You are the one who decided to talk on and on about the alleged mental health problems of gay people, suggesting, with no clear reason, that gay people suffer from mental health issues not because of how we are treated, but for some other reason that you failed to state.

The article to which you link simply says that gay people, according to the study, are at greater risk for depressive disorders and substance abuse than are heterosexuals. It does not say why. The article to which you link does not challenge the idea that gay people suffer more from depressive disorders because of how we are treated.

Maybe if people stopped attacking gay people and let us live our lives as full human beings, our risk of depressive disorders and risk of substance abuse would lessen.

If you want to get an idea about why gay people might get depressed, try living for a year as an openly gay person. That doesn't mean you have to go out and have sex. Just tell people around you that you are gay, and see how people treat you. Try walking down the street holding hands with a woman, and see what happens to you. Then, after a year, come back and report on this experience. I have no doubt it would be eye opening for you.

Posts can be offensive without violating the rules of the forums. Your post was offensive, because it was obviously aimed at nothing more than attacking gay people. You showed no compassion for gay people in your post whatsoever. It's not even clear why you think gay people may be at higher risk for depression, if you question the argument that it's because of how we are treated. At any rate, you seem to have the desire to attack gay people, not to show the love of Jesus to all.

I posted one post in response to a post that homosexuality doesn't hurt anyone so it is ok with God.

It wasn't about mental illness, but physical findings of illnesses and how they related to homosexuality.

Then I posted one post in resonse to a post that stated that suicides in homosexuals is due to intolarance and non-exceptance.

I posted the link to where I got the information, but never once commented on mental illness, because that wasn't what I was posting about.

You brought up mental illness not me. NONE of my post had anything to do with it. So why do you want to make it about mental illness? If I read someones link and started bringing in things that have nothing to do with the origin post you were responding to I would be told it was a red herring, or strawman, etc.

So again, I wasn't posting about mental illness, and never brought it up, that was you. Again, if you have information that the sites given are putting out false information let them know.

I will only comment on what I was posting about, which again wasn't and isn't mental illness. So I am attacking no one, and no matter how many times you say it will not make it so.

 

[Ohioprof]

Actually, it is savedandhappy1 who is being charged with presenting propaganda, sacerdote.


Yes, you are correct. Our motives are only to present the truth of Scripture--God's message to humanity. It is law for everyone, but not everyone accepts it as law, and so they violate it...which is why in scripture, homosexuals are referred to as "homosexual offenders."

What you regard as the "truth" is just your beliefs. It's not the "truth," but rather your beliefs about truth.

The term "homosexual offenders" is an inaccurate translation of the Bible. The term "homosexual" did not exist at the time the various books of the Bible were written.

 

[Floatingaxe]

So back off, please, and quit attacking gay people. It's not what Jesus would do.

Back off? I have a right here.

Why do you think you know what Jesus would do? When He walked among men, He was pressed in on all sides by throngs of people who were repenting of their sins.

Somehow I don't think that many homosexuals today would be at His feet in prostration confessing their sin. Their hearts are hardened to that fact. In Jesus' day, it was a known sin and people were tender toward it. Those who were callous about it, well--they weren't around Jesus! They would head for the hills!

Anyone who would stand toe-to-toe to Jesus and defend their sin would be crazy to do so. In fact, the only unrepentant people who were healed and forgiven were the demoniacs who were delivered and made right by Jesus---because of the faith of others who believed.

Also, when Jesus presented a deeper commitment to many of his hundreds of disciples, many of them abandoned Him. Guess what? He simply allowed them to go. This tells me that a homosexual who is brazen enough to present themselves before Jesus Christ and His people as unrepentant, they should be given the truth and allowed to walk away. Jesus mourns the lack of belief in His truth, as do I, but you are entitled to make the decision to deny His ways.