Give me a Reason.

[TheFathersDaughter]

Seriously. Give me a reason homosexuality should be wrong. Assume for a second the Bible never ever mentions homosexuality. Under that circumstance, what consequences of homosexuality make it so horrible.

Some debunkings before hand:

1 - No babies/unnatural sex: So what? Does this mean those who can't have children shouldn't get married either? I should hope not. Then define unnatural. So some people, being left handed is unnatural. To others, wearing clothes is unnatural. To say something is unnatural is very personal since nature is so difficult to define. (Besides, natural ultimately means it exists in nature. And we've already determined that homosexuality definitely exists in nature.)
2 - HIV/AIDS: You're not going to get HIV/AIDS in a monogamous relationship. Because HIV/AIDS doesn't magically appear. It's contracted.

So besides that, what have you got? I've asked this question, along with many others, and we're ALWAYS ignored or we're given the same old verses. WHAT CONSEQUENCES ARE THERE?

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

Seriously. Give me a reason homosexuality should be wrong. Assume for a second the Bible never ever mentions homosexuality. Under that circumstance, what consequences of homosexuality make it so horrible.

Some debunkings before hand:

1 - No babies/unnatural sex: So what? Does this mean those who can't have children shouldn't get married either? I should hope not. Then define unnatural. So some people, being left handed is unnatural. To others, wearing clothes is unnatural. To say something is unnatural is very personal since nature is so difficult to define. (Besides, natural ultimately means it exists in nature. And we've already determined that homosexuality definitely exists in nature.)
2 - HIV/AIDS: You're not going to get HIV/AIDS in a monogamous relationship. Because HIV/AIDS doesn't magically appear. It's contracted.

So besides that, what have you got? I've asked this question, along with many others, and we're ALWAYS ignored or we're given the same old verses. WHAT CONSEQUENCES ARE THERE?

So, assuming the Scriptures never mention homosexuality as a sin...

God has specifically blessed the nuclear family as the fullness of his image. Creation was not complete until the man had his female companion, and the very first command given to them was to be fruitful and multiply (no, I am not a creationist; no, I do not believe in a literal Eve; but the thematic emphasis of the passage remains authoritative).

God the Father has a self-image. That image is the Son, the image of the invisible God. Their love together eternally generates the third person, the Spirit. Together this Trinity is family- a self-contained community of love.

The nuclear family is God's reflection on earth. It is the basic covenant unit of our eschatological community. The image of God represents God in his fullness through the coming together of husband and wife and their rearing of children.

 

[ReformedChapin]

Seriously. Give me a reason homosexuality should be wrong. Assume for a second the Bible never ever mentions homosexuality. Under that circumstance, what consequences of homosexuality make it so horrible.

Some debunkings before hand:

1 - No babies/unnatural sex: So what? Does this mean those who can't have children shouldn't get married either? I should hope not. Then define unnatural. So some people, being left handed is unnatural. To others, wearing clothes is unnatural. To say something is unnatural is very personal since nature is so difficult to define. (Besides, natural ultimately means it exists in nature. And we've already determined that homosexuality definitely exists in nature.)
2 - HIV/AIDS: You're not going to get HIV/AIDS in a monogamous relationship. Because HIV/AIDS doesn't magically appear. It's contracted.

So besides that, what have you got? I've asked this question, along with many others, and we're ALWAYS ignored or we're given the same old verses. WHAT CONSEQUENCES ARE THERE?

Under your circumstances I would have to divert from all biblical-morality. One would result in pragmatism, that's beside the fact that all laws would be unstructured. Applying your reasoning I could easily say what's wrong with killing someone? Who cares? There wouldn't be a justifcation against hurting someone.

I would like to ask you HOW WOULD WE DERIVE ETHICS WITHOUT SCRIPTURE?

 

[TheFathersDaughter]

Under your circumstances I would have to divert from all biblical-morality. One would result in pragmatism, that's beside the fact that all laws would be unstructured. Applying your reasoning I could easily say what's wrong with killing someone? Who cares? There wouldn't be a justifcation against hurting someone.

I would like to ask you HOW WOULD WE DERIVE ETHICS WITHOUT SCRIPTURE?

Wrong. Again you're dodging the actual matter and the burden of proof. All sin has consequence either for the one that sins or for the rest of the world. Without the spiritual guilt, there is no consequence of homosexuality. And the illustration of what is 'normal' (like what Gratia was trying to say) is based only on the image of Adam and Eve when anyone against incest in the Bible will tell you OTHERS existed as well.

If you murder someone, obviously, you are acting as God. God is the only one who can create life and He is the only one who can take life. Not to mention the mental consequences the family will have to suffer through.

 

[DMagoh]

Seriously. Give me a reason homosexuality should be wrong. Assume for a second the Bible never ever mentions homosexuality.

Is that the argument that you are going to use on Judgement Day. "God, I just didnt see any justification for homosexual behavior to be wrong...other than You said it in the Bible. But that wasnt enough for me. It didnt make sense to me so I just ignored it." See how well that flys.

By the way, do you think you are worthy to question God's reasons? The Bible says...

13 Who has understood the mind of the LORD,
or instructed him as his counselor?
14 Whom did the LORD consult to enlighten him,
and who taught him the right way?
Who was it that taught him knowledge
or showed him the path of understanding?
Isaiah 40:13-14

 

[ReformedChapin]

Wrong. Again you're dodging the actual matter and the burden of proof. All sin has consequence either for the one that sins or for the rest of the world. Without the spiritual guilt, there is no consequence of homosexuality. And the illustration of what is 'normal' (like what Gratia was trying to say) is based only on the image of Adam and Eve when anyone against incest in the Bible will tell you OTHERS existed as well.

If you murder someone, obviously, you are acting as God. God is the only one who can create life and He is the only one who can take life. Not to mention the mental consequences the family will have to suffer through.

What the heck is spiritual guilt? Where does it come from and how do you know it's from God? It comes from the BIBLE.

Also who cares if others suffer? How is it wrong? You are cheating, you are reffering to scripture again neglecting at the same time.

You cannot justify your own points without deriving them from the source which is scripture.

Please again I ask that educate yourself and see what burden of proof is and realize that I need not to provide proof when I'm analyzing your views through logic (study that as well). Also please tell me how I am dodging the question when I analyzed your pressupositions and destroyed your argument.

BTW if you argue that "spiritual guilt" is what we should relay on, it would be highly subjective since I can say that "my spiritual guiltiness" is telling me that homosexuality is wrong. There would be no way of objectively finding out which is right without scripture (again).

 

[TheFathersDaughter]

Is that the argument that you are going to use on Judgement Day. "God, I just didnt see any justification for homosexual behavior to be wrong...other than You said it in the Bible. But that wasnt enough for me. It didnt make sense to me so I just ignored it." See how well that flys.

By the way, do you think you are worthy to question God's reasons? The Bible says...

13 Who has understood the mind of the LORD,
or instructed him as his counselor?
14 Whom did the LORD consult to enlighten him,
and who taught him the right way?
Who was it that taught him knowledge
or showed him the path of understanding?
Isaiah 40:13-14

Did I say it was going to be? Or are you just trying to doge the discussion? Answer the question or admit you have no reason. Or don't post at all. I won't care. But don't come in here and turn the subject to suit your purposes. Isn't that what you yell at us for?

 

[TheFathersDaughter]

What the heck is spiritual guilt? Where does it come from and how do you know it's from God? It comes from the BIBLE.

Also who cares if others suffer? How is it wrong? You are cheating, you are reffering to scripture again neglecting at the same time.

You cannot justify your own points without deriving them from the source which is scripture.

Please again I ask that educate yourself and see what burden of proof is and realize that I need not to provide proof when I'm analyzing your views through logic (study that as well). Also please tell me how I am dodging the question when I analyzed your pressupositions and destroyed your argument.

BTW if you argue that "spiritual guilt" is what we should relay on, it would be highly subjective since I can say that "my spiritual guiltiness" is telling me that homosexuality is wrong. There would be no way of objectively finding out which is right without scripture (again).

There's a difference between ignore the Bible and ignoring God. What if the Bible only had the stories, no law, is what I'm trying to get across. So you're just dodging again. Spiritual guilt is the automatic guilt. You do NOT get your guilt by reading the Bible. That's called anecdotal guilt (what I call it anyway). It's the false guilt you get when you do something you were told not to do, whether it's wrong or right is not an issue. SPIRITUAL GUILT is the guilt you are born with, the message God sends out when you do something wrong in His eyes. That is the only true guilt and it doesn't come from the Bible.

It's a consequence. Consequences don't have to be DIRECT. They just have to exist. Homosexuality affects no one.

Again, you're simply dodging the discussion. I would love for you to come in and not try to pick up every little loophole just so you don't have to admit: "Well okay, there's nothing wrong physically or mentally". I seriously won't use it against you. I just hate being ignored and would like a REAL ANSWER.

 

[DMagoh]

There's a difference between ignore the Bible and ignoring God...

How? Jesus thought scripture was important to know what was right and wrong. Jesus said...

Jesus replied, "You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures..."
Matthew 22:29

The way you know what is right and wrong IS scripture. The point of your question is moot.

 

[ReformedChapin]

There's a difference between ignore the Bible and ignoring God. What if the Bible only had the stories, no law, is what I'm trying to get across. So you're just dodging again. Spiritual guilt is the automatic guilt. You do NOT get your guilt by reading the Bible. That's called anecdotal guilt (what I call it anyway). It's the false guilt you get when you do something you were told not to do, whether it's wrong or right is not an issue. SPIRITUAL GUILT is the guilt you are born with, the message God sends out when you do something wrong in His eyes. That is the only true guilt and it doesn't come from the Bible.

It's a consequence. Consequences don't have to be DIRECT. They just have to exist. Homosexuality affects no one.

Again, you're simply dodging the discussion. I would love for you to come in and not try to pick up every little loophole just so you don't have to admit: "Well okay, there's nothing wrong physically or mentally". I seriously won't use it against you. I just hate being ignored and would like a REAL ANSWER.

Actually I'm showing how illogical your position is. What you are basically stating is that we should recognize right or wrong without the bible..that it's "evident." Well you are wrong, you cut off the bible then you have nothing, ethics go down the drain. You cannot tell something is "right or wrong" without the bible...get that in your head.

 

[TheFathersDaughter]

Actually I'm showing how illogical your position is. What you are basically stating is that we should recognize right or wrong without the bible..that it's "evident." Well you are wrong, you cut off the bible then you have nothing, ethics go down the drain. You cannot tell something is "right or wrong" without the bible...get that in your head.

Get what across my head? That all you can do is assume? I asked a simple question. How is it you can assume that by that question I'm trying to determine right and wrong? I'm not. I simply would like to know. Now instead of accusing me so wrongly ANSWER THE QUESTION.

 

[ReformedChapin]

Get what across my head? That all you can do is assume? I asked a simple question. How is it you can assume that by that question I'm trying to determine right and wrong? I'm not. I simply would like to know. Now instead of accusing me so wrongly ANSWER THE QUESTION.

I did already you just don't want to accept it. Without the bible there is no such thing as right or wrong. How complicated is that? I don't know who your god is but my god is the God of the bible.

 

[TheFathersDaughter]

I did already you just don't want to accept it. Without the bible there is no such thing as right or wrong. How complicated is that? I don't know who your god is but my god is the God of the bible.

That isn't an answer. Because it's a dodge. I didn't ask "without the Bible is it right?" I asked "what are the consequences of homosexuality outside of the Bible". NOW ANSWER THAT. Stop dodging the question and answer. Or admit you don't have an answer. Just stop dodging the question to make yourself seem right.

 

[ReformedChapin]

That isn't an answer. Because it's a dodge. I didn't ask "without the Bible is it right?" I asked "what are the consequences of homosexuality outside of the Bible". NOW ANSWER THAT. Stop dodging the question and answer. Or admit you don't have an answer. Just stop dodging the question to make yourself seem right.

Fine I don't have an answer because it's a useless question. That's like saying question is Christianity without Christ or the scriptures. Or even more useless quesion why does God allow the color red? Who cares?

 

[DMagoh]

I asked "what are the consequences of homosexuality outside of the Bible"...

What are the consequences of having sex with a chicken outside of the Bible?

 

[TheFathersDaughter]

What are the consequences of having sex with a chicken outside of the Bible?

Aside from the fact that might not be possible considering the Biology is different, having sex with a chicken is a disease fest waiting to happen. Beastality is what led to AIDS. I can only imagine how bad the bird flu would be under those circumstance.

 

[TheFathersDaughter]

Fine I don't have an answer because it's a useless question. That's like saying question is Christianity without Christ or the scriptures. Or even more useless quesion why does God allow the color red? Who cares?

Useless question? It's not a useless question. The fact that YOU can't answer it makes it useless to YOU and YOUR argument is your problem. It's a very useful question. It just doesn't help you in proving "HOMOSEXUALITY IS WRONG".

 

[ReformedChapin]

Useless question? It's not a useless question. The fact that YOU can't answer it makes it useless to YOU and YOUR argument is your problem. It's a very useful question. It just doesn't help you in proving "HOMOSEXUALITY IS WRONG".

It proves nothing...thats your problem. You are so consumed with your homosexual sin that you try to find anything to deny it.

 

[TheFathersDaughter]

It proves nothing...thats your problem. You are so consumed with your homosexual sin that you try to find anything to deny it.

It does prove something and it raises more questions. It just doesn't prove anything on your side. Why not be a little more open-minded. Oh, I forgot, being tolerant will send you straight to hell. That's why God always permits hate.

 

[ReformedChapin]

It does prove something and it raises more questions. It just doesn't prove anything on your side. Why not be a little more open-minded. Oh, I forgot, being tolerant will send you straight to hell. That's why God always permits hate.

Oh please tell me what questions it "opens". Especially since without scripture there is no such thing as ethics.

BTW if you want to define "tolerence" as denying sin then I'm the most intolerant person in this website. You hippies can try to pervert Gods commands as much as you want but it's not going to happen here. Not only that but you are close minded as well since homosexuality cannot possibly be wrong.