Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
God did not intend for a woman to be with another woman. And for a man to be with another man. There is law in some states that two woman and two men can not get married. My state is one of them.I have a question for some of the Christians out there: Can you prove that homosexuality is wrong, harmful, dangerous, etc. without using the Bible?
The reason I ask this question is because on this forum there have beel a lot of debates about if it is wrong from a biblical perspective and why. It just seems to me that if homosexuality is a sin, there should be evidence as to why it is wrong outside of the Bible. Murder is a sin but you don't need the Bible to realize that. The same goes with many other sins.
Being gay is not an abomination against God. You can believe whatever you want about gay people, but those are your beliefs. They are not what God thinks. You are attributing your own anti-gay attitudes to God.God did not intend for a woman to be with another woman. And for a man to be with another man. There is law in some states that two woman and two men can not get married. My state is one of them.
People do not want to believe that homosexuality is an abomination against God. Because once they obtatin that knowledge, they would have to change if they really and truely love God. And no one wants to change, not because they can't, it is because they refuse.
explain WHY "God considers homosexuality an abomination" and I might take you seriously... of course, if all you've got is "the Bible SEZ!" you needn't botherGod did not intend for a woman to be with another woman. And for a man to be with another man. There is law in some states that two woman and two men can not get married. My state is one of them.
People do not want to believe that homosexuality is an abomination against God. Because once they obtatin that knowledge, they would have to change if they really and truely love God. And no one wants to change, not because they can't, it is because they refuse.
sin is a description of acts that harm other people, that we could avoid if we desire to be "better"Ok friends. EnemyParty and Wiccan_child, because I lack understanding of your views on a certain issue, I want to gain some understanding:
Explain to me what sin is how it entered the world, as if I didn't know the bible
Explain to me about Satan as if I didn't know the bible.
I'm not going to comment on your replies for this post, so you won't have to worry about me disagreeing with what you say, and you can send it to me in PM if you would like.
Thank you,
God bless,
Rob =)
If I say, 'Wow, that's a good PC you got there', I am not referring to it's morality.Adam and Eve and Satan use to be all good, until they either sinned or sin was found in them. Remember, God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds and the livestock according to their kinds, and everything that creeps on the ground according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. (Genesis 1:25)
Satan use to be good.
Adam and Eve use to be good.
I do not believe :If you don't believe in that story, then what do you believe concerning the origin of Satan and sin?
With all due respect, you have shown nothing. For the sake of argument, assume the Eden story is true, and sin entered the world.I explained homosexuality came as a result of sin entering into our lives, as a result of Adam's actions. Because we became sinful, we also became immoral. You keep asking this question, and I keep showing you a picture, but you don't believe in it, do you?
My beliefs are irrelevant. I am debating your beliefs, your statements.Surely you do not believe because you are a pagan and follow a different set beliefs?
See my above example with the car. 'Good' can mean 'morally right', or 'more than sufficient for it's purpose'. Saying 'and it was good' when referring to Creation is, I believe, an example of the latter.God saw his creation was good. God calls them good, therefore, they were good.
To sin is to intentionally go against divine commandments. Sin 'enters the world' by one of the following methods:Explain to me what sin is how it entered the world, as if I didn't know the bible
Satan is a semi-divine entity primarily occupied with tempting humanity into indulgence. He is not evil, unlike most preconceptions.Explain to me about Satan as if I didn't know the bible.
You would speak for your god? How arrogant.God did not intend for a woman to be with another woman. And for a man to be with another man.
And there are laws in the UK and in some US states that do allow same-sex marriage.There is law in some states that two woman and two men can not get married. My state is one of them.
Can you demonstrate that it is?People do not want to believe that homosexuality is an abomination against God.
Quite.Because once they obtatin that knowledge, they would have to change if they really and truely love God. And no one wants to change, not because they can't, it is because they refuse.
Sin does not only harm other people. It can also be the harming of oneself. For example, (and forgive me but I am going to use Scripture...can't believe I just had to say that in a Christian forum) 1 Corinthians 6:18, "Flee immorality. Every other sin a man commits is outside the body, but the immoral man sins against his own body." Anyway, there are sins which do not blatantly harm another person. There are sinful thoughts and acts that seem harmless to others. "Sins against his own body" sounds very similar to Paul's passage to the sexual decadent Roman society, "and in the same way also men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecnet acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error." (1:28).sin is a description of acts that harm other people, that we could avoid if we desire to be "better"
Your citing of a description of HIV/AIDS in the middle of your post is exceptionally indicative of bias...Sin does not only harm other people. It can also be the harming of oneself. For example, (and forgive me but I am going to use Scripture...can't believe I just had to say that in a Christian forum) 1 Corinthians 6:18, "Flee immorality. Every other sin a man commits is outside the body, but the immoral man sins against his own body." Anyway, there are sins which do not blatantly harm another person. There are sinful thoughts and acts that seem harmless to others. "Sins against his own body" sounds very similar to Paul's passage to the sexual decadent Roman society, "and in the same way also men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecnet acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error." (1:28).
The human immunodeficiency virus -- Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (HIV-AIDS)1 -- is a deadly virus that can live for a few seconds outside the body but is primarily transmitted by unprotected sexual intercourse, infected needles, and by transmission of blood or other bodily fluids. Everyone knows that HIV-AIDS is fatal. There are three major modes of HIV transmission today: (1) sexual contact involving the exchange of sperm or vaginal secretions; (2) from mother to fetus or through breast feeding; and (3) between intravenous drug users who share unsterilized needles and syringes. Medical findings support that HIV is not transmitted through casual contact. In Missouri, homosexual sex accounts for 72% of all HIV transmissions; drug usage 9%; a combination of homosexual sex and drug usage another 9%; heterosexual 6%; blood transfusion 1.5%; and prenatal .5%.
http://www.mobar.org/journal/1998/janfeb/wampler.htm
Biologically and anatomically speaking, who would possibly argue that the male and female reproductive organs are not made for use together. It is as simple as the fact that the square peg fits in the square shaped hole. It doesn't matter if you can force it into the round shaped hole, that isn't its designed function.
Negative effects of homosexuality have been manifested and recorded psychologically and physically. From STD transmission to a higher suicide risk, homosexuality certainly has negative ramifications (not saying that this is true of every single person with such preferences, for all those who are going to say how "happy" many monogamous homosexual couples are).
For specific examples and citations see this link (http://www.endeavourforum.org.au/nov05-10.htm) by Dr. Timothy J. Dailey, Ph.D.
How is it not obvious that male and female reproductive organs were designed for specific use together? How is it not obvious that male/female attraction is the intent?
Are sociopaths' actions acceptable being it is how they were born? Because it is totally "natural" to them?
No, there is no evidence to suggest homosexuality came about on its own. And I'd like to see you cite some. Do you know for sure what happened all around the world at any given time in history?Since I have no idea what site you're talking about, I'll chalk this up to lack of advertising.
A crude description, but accurate enough. What is your point?
You are asking for someone to prove a negative. Since there is no reason to believe that homosexuality came about because of direct intervention, and there is every reason to believe that it did, well, the logic speaks for itself.
Proof is for mathematics and alcohol. Biology deals in evidenced probability, and the evidence points to natural homosexuality.
no, No, NO NO! Sexual function and reproductive function are NOT THE SAME THING!!!!!!!No, there is no evidence to suggest homosexuality came about on its own. And I'd like to see you cite some. Do you know for sure what happened all around the world at any given time in history?
If you have to ask what my point is with the sperm and the egg...
Eggs happen in females and hermaphrodites- the latter is a very rare occurance. Sperm come from males. They are designed for sex. Their parts are designed for sex.
Oh, you cite Timothy Dailey, who works for the Family Research Council. He has written extensively on how terrible "homosexuality" is. The problem is that Timothy Dailey is NOT a scientist. He does not hold a PhD in psychology or even in sociology. What are his credentials?Sin does not only harm other people. It can also be the harming of oneself. For example, (and forgive me but I am going to use Scripture...can't believe I just had to say that in a Christian forum) 1 Corinthians 6:18, "Flee immorality. Every other sin a man commits is outside the body, but the immoral man sins against his own body." Anyway, there are sins which do not blatantly harm another person. There are sinful thoughts and acts that seem harmless to others. "Sins against his own body" sounds very similar to Paul's passage to the sexual decadent Roman society, "and in the same way also men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecnet acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error." (1:28).
The human immunodeficiency virus -- Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (HIV-AIDS)1 -- is a deadly virus that can live for a few seconds outside the body but is primarily transmitted by unprotected sexual intercourse, infected needles, and by transmission of blood or other bodily fluids. Everyone knows that HIV-AIDS is fatal. There are three major modes of HIV transmission today: (1) sexual contact involving the exchange of sperm or vaginal secretions; (2) from mother to fetus or through breast feeding; and (3) between intravenous drug users who share unsterilized needles and syringes. Medical findings support that HIV is not transmitted through casual contact. In Missouri, homosexual sex accounts for 72% of all HIV transmissions; drug usage 9%; a combination of homosexual sex and drug usage another 9%; heterosexual 6%; blood transfusion 1.5%; and prenatal .5%.
http://www.mobar.org/journal/1998/janfeb/wampler.htm
Biologically and anatomically speaking, who would possibly argue that the male and female reproductive organs are not made for use together. It is as simple as the fact that the square peg fits in the square shaped hole. It doesn't matter if you can force it into the round shaped hole, that isn't its designed function.
Negative effects of homosexuality have been manifested and recorded psychologically and physically. From STD transmission to a higher suicide risk, homosexuality certainly has negative ramifications (not saying that this is true of every single person with such preferences, for all those who are going to say how "happy" many monogamous homosexual couples are).
For specific examples and citations see this link (http://www.endeavourforum.org.au/nov05-10.htm) by Dr. Timothy J. Dailey, Ph.D.
How is it not obvious that male and female reproductive organs were designed for specific use together? How is it not obvious that male/female attraction is the intent?
Are sociopaths' actions acceptable being it is how they were born? Because it is totally "natural" to them?
Besides relying on phony research, as I have explained above, your post starts with the assumption that human organs were "designed." You don't know that they were "designed." We do know that they evolved.Sin does not only harm other people. It can also be the harming of oneself. For example, (and forgive me but I am going to use Scripture...can't believe I just had to say that in a Christian forum) 1 Corinthians 6:18, "Flee immorality. Every other sin a man commits is outside the body, but the immoral man sins against his own body." Anyway, there are sins which do not blatantly harm another person. There are sinful thoughts and acts that seem harmless to others. "Sins against his own body" sounds very similar to Paul's passage to the sexual decadent Roman society, "and in the same way also men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecnet acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error." (1:28).
The human immunodeficiency virus -- Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (HIV-AIDS)1 -- is a deadly virus that can live for a few seconds outside the body but is primarily transmitted by unprotected sexual intercourse, infected needles, and by transmission of blood or other bodily fluids. Everyone knows that HIV-AIDS is fatal. There are three major modes of HIV transmission today: (1) sexual contact involving the exchange of sperm or vaginal secretions; (2) from mother to fetus or through breast feeding; and (3) between intravenous drug users who share unsterilized needles and syringes. Medical findings support that HIV is not transmitted through casual contact. In Missouri, homosexual sex accounts for 72% of all HIV transmissions; drug usage 9%; a combination of homosexual sex and drug usage another 9%; heterosexual 6%; blood transfusion 1.5%; and prenatal .5%.
http://www.mobar.org/journal/1998/janfeb/wampler.htm
Biologically and anatomically speaking, who would possibly argue that the male and female reproductive organs are not made for use together. It is as simple as the fact that the square peg fits in the square shaped hole. It doesn't matter if you can force it into the round shaped hole, that isn't its designed function.
Negative effects of homosexuality have been manifested and recorded psychologically and physically. From STD transmission to a higher suicide risk, homosexuality certainly has negative ramifications (not saying that this is true of every single person with such preferences, for all those who are going to say how "happy" many monogamous homosexual couples are).
For specific examples and citations see this link (http://www.endeavourforum.org.au/nov05-10.htm) by Dr. Timothy J. Dailey, Ph.D.
How is it not obvious that male and female reproductive organs were designed for specific use together? How is it not obvious that male/female attraction is the intent?
Are sociopaths' actions acceptable being it is how they were born? Because it is totally "natural" to them?
But that isn't really evidence that homosexuality is wrong or harmful outside of the Bible.God did not intend for a woman to be with another woman. And for a man to be with another man. There is law in some states that two woman and two men can not get married. My state is one of them.
Its not that we don't want to its just that we don't. Why would I have any reason to believe that homosexuality is wrong?People do not want to believe that homosexuality is an abomination against God.
Because once they obtatin that knowledge, they would have to change if they really and truely love God.
Why would I want to change something about me that I know isn't wrong? That is like telling someone to change their eye color.And no one wants to change, not because they can't, it is because they refuse.
The parts go together. They are designed to be fitted together. You cannot deny that much, surely.no, No, NO NO! Sexual function and reproductive function are NOT THE SAME THING!!!!!!!
They are RELATED sure... but NOT THE SAME.
No one disagrees that homosexual intimacy will not result in reproduction... but reproduction is not the POINT of homosexual intimacy, and that is NOT what we are claiming it is!
well proof is one of those weasel words... no, I probably can't PROVE homosexuality is natural, just like I can't PROVE a giant invisible pink spider isn't sleeping on your couch... however all available evidence supports those conclussionsThe parts go together. They are designed to be fitted together. You cannot deny that much, surely.
And I don't see you denying my logic in saying that we cannot prove that it is or isn't natural, or continuing to spout that it is, so I'll (unless you clarify) take that to mean that you accept that you can't prove homosexuality's being natural.
*blank look* what? Um... I don't understand what you mean... although I suspect you are really just interested in making it impossible to PROVE homosexuality is natural... of course, the other side of the coin is it is impossible to prove homosexuality is UNnatural, or that heterosexuality is natural, or even that we aren't all really pink unicorns dreaming of being humans...Yeah, sure it does. You can't even *begin* to even give anything that remotely resembles evidence on whether or not it is natural unless you knew exactly what went on with the first gay person. And the Bible doesn't even give us that.
so what is it, artificial?There's plenty of doubt that (A) homosexuality is natural
Um, thats because no biological process is DESIGNED they EVOLVEThere's plenty of doubt that (B) it is designed and
the Bible doesn't THINK anything... I think this is part of the problem, that you somehow think the Bible is capable of making such decisions, and possed of some sort of devinity all by itselfThere's plenty of doubt that (C) that the Bible condones it and thinks its natural.
no one is denying male and female sex organs go together... but the ways homosexuals use their sex parts they go together just as well.The parts go together. They are designed to be fitted together. You cannot deny that much, surely.
And I don't see you denying my logic in saying that we cannot prove that it is or isn't natural, or continuing to spout that it is, so I'll (unless you clarify) take that to mean that you accept that you can't prove homosexuality's being natural.
The Bible=God's words, in the eyes of most real Christians, keeping in mind that Christian is a Christ follower. God thinks, last time I checked.*blank look* what? Um... I don't understand what you mean... although I suspect you are really just interested in making it impossible to PROVE homosexuality is natural... of course, the other side of the coin is it is impossible to prove homosexuality is UNnatural, or that heterosexuality is natural, or even that we aren't all really pink unicorns dreaming of being humans...
but agin, all the evidence suggests homosexuality is natural.so what is it, artificial? Um, thats because no biological process is DESIGNED they EVOLVEthe Bible doesn't THINK anything... I think this is part of the problem, that you somehow think the Bible is capable of making such decisions, and possed of some sort of devinity all by itself
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?