Homosexuallity is the same as polygamy

[david_x]

Yes, great point Enemyparty...David X and a few others are hijacking by making this about hurt and killing, which has nothing to do with the thread.

sorry didn't mean to, just voicing flaws in said theory.

 

[Full_Moon]

Feel free to show us how homosexuality is an "error" and that our lives would be better without it?

Can you do it without the Leviticus or Romans?

Observe it in real life. If you can't recognize perversion than what else can I say? Christians submit themselves to Christ as a moral guide. So again I say: Ask God to show you.

Sexual perversion is such that anyone can argue "There is surely no harm"-Satan. The sin occurs within the body rather than externally like most other forms of immorality.

'Sola Scriptura' (scripture alone), is enough.

 

[Full_Moon]

But you HAVN'T been able to tell us you disagree with homosexuality morally... you say you disapprove of homosexuality because of the Bible... but the Bible does NOT=morality without appropriate interpretation...

now, if you can give us a secular moral argument against homosexuality, I'm all ears...

If you were all ears than you would have heard what the scriptures clearly say.

These arguments quickly turn into people taking 'shots' at eachother. There is no rhyme or reason. If scripture condemns homosexual acts ONCE that is enough, debate over!

It just becomes absurd.

 

[PinkTulip]

But you HAVN'T been able to tell us you disagree with homosexuality morally... you say you disapprove of homosexuality because of the Bible... but the Bible does NOT=morality without appropriate interpretation...

now, if you can give us a secular moral argument against homosexuality, I'm all ears...

This is a fallacious argument considering 90% of the world’s population believes in God in one form or another. Since the beginning of time humans have been defining morality on the basis of religion, so no one can give an answer that is not dependent upon a religious underpinning. Every major religion – Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity and Islam - condemns homosexuality. Even the Dali Lama states that homosexuality is wrong for practising Buddhists. It seems as the only answer that may satisfy you would be one that supports nihilism.

 

[Full_Moon]

[F New Roman]This is a fallacious argument considering 90% of the world’s population believes in God in one form or another. Since the beginning of time humans have been defining morality on the basis of religion, so no one can give an answer that is not dependent upon a religious underpinning. Every major religion – Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity and Islam - condemns homosexuality. Even the Dali Lama states that homosexuality is wrong for practising Buddhists. It seems as the only answer that may satisfy you would be one that supports nihilism.[/FONT]

I believe that Paul's description of the godlessness of men who suppress the truth with their wickedness describes the circumstance (first chapter of Romans). It is for this reason that God gave them over to sinful and unnatural relations. They would become inflamed with lust for one another, men for men and women for women, committing indecent acts.

I don't believe it takes a religous person to know about morality because everyone has a conscience. It is a dark and seared off conscience that cannot see the sickness of homosexual acts. The only reason it is included in OT law and mentioned in NT scripture is that people are that dark. No one should have to be told such things as this. No one should have to be told "do not kill", but yet people justify killing and so it is written by the word of God "Do not kill". In history and in this very day we find entire socities where it is socially accepted to commit certain genocidal acts. eg: Nazi Germany, more so Rawanda, Sudan, Vietnam. Our own society accepts the mass murder of the unborn as well as homosexual crimes. Yet in both we say "There is surely no harm", like Satan, "You will not surely die"

"Do not lie with another man as one lies with a woman" ... "they shall both be put to death"

This is known by nature, but people act against nature and turn to all kinds of godless acts. They imitate beasts and become no more than beasts. This is why all those who are not in the book of life are said to be worshipping the beast with man's number. eg:

"I, a man-beast, know best. If the bible disagrees it is wrong, if the bible agrees it is right" -in this the highest authority is the beast.

People argue morality on a religious basis because only God decides morality. Arguing on a human basis is invalid because of who and what we are as animals. The only reason homosexual acts are now legal is that it is society that decides the law and society has left the church. Sodomy was always illegal until the 60's and was a serious crime.

 

[davedjy]

Sodomy was always illegal until the 60's and was a serious crime

Slavery was legal in the olden days...

So much for historical context being morally acceptable...

 

[Full_Moon]

Slavery was legal in the olden days...

So much for historical context being morally acceptable...

Interesting that you pick my 'interesting point' as something to respond to while neglecting every real point made before-hand.

While it is meaningless to justify or condemn something based on historical context it also works for the present historical context.

Just because we think slavery is immoral today doesn't make it immoral today. Just because we thought slavery was moral yesterday doesn't mean it was moral yesterday.

You, Dave, think that slavery is immoral and that homosexual acts can be moral. You constantly argue from todays perspective by using the example that slavery was once accepted but now we "know" that it is immoral. Therefore, you conclude, homosexual deeds which were once considered immoral are now moral with todays knowledge.

The problem with this thinking, which I repeatedly point out, is that you are basing your morality on what YOU know and what YOU believe, rather than truth.

Slavery was abolished on Christian principles. Divorce was abolished by the Catholic church on Christian principles. Yet today we have systems that enslave people without being responsible for them. We have rampant divorce rates and the separation of husband/wife without legal consequence.

It was surely better for a slave under Torah law back in Moses's day than for your average employee today.

The law works with the reality of divorce and the reality of slavery without justifying either. If only we could apply these principles to the current day. For as it was, so it is and so shall it always be. The Ways of God are Perfect forever.

I'll add to that: every single law of the Torah is in response to something immoral, ie: a transgression against God. Regarding morally upright things there needs to be no law. Hence the law regarding homosexual acts.

 

[davedjy]

Interesting that you pick my 'interesting point' as something to respond to while neglecting every real point made before-hand.

While it is meaningless to justify or condemn something based on historical context it also works for the present historical context.

Just because we think slavery is immoral today doesn't make it immoral today. Just because we thought slavery was moral yesterday doesn't mean it was moral yesterday.

You, Dave, think that slavery is immoral and that homosexual acts can be moral. You constantly argue from todays perspective by using the example that slavery was once accepted but now we "know" that it is immoral. Therefore, you conclude, homosexual deeds which were once considered immoral are now moral with todays knowledge.

The problem with this thinking, which I repeatedly point out, is that you are basing your morality on what YOU know and what YOU believe, rather than truth.

Slavery was abolished on Christian principles. Divorce was abolished by the Catholic church on Christian principles. Yet today we have systems that enslave people without being responsible for them. We have rampant divorce rates and the separation of husband/wife without legal consequence.

It was surely better for a slave under Torah law back in Moses's day than for your average employee today.

The law works with the reality of divorce and the reality of slavery without justifying either. If only we could apply these principles to the current day. For as it was, so it is and so shall it always be. The Ways of God are Perfect forever.

I'll add to that: every single law of the Torah is in response to something immoral, ie: a transgression against God. Regarding morally upright things there needs to be no law. Hence the law regarding homosexual acts.

You have yet to find me an example of a loving, monogamous homosexual relationship condemned. Even Leviticus is talking about a pagan orgy worship ritual, which is a ritual impurity. YOU are cherry picking the law, not me.

 

[Scotishfury09]

Davedjy, you seem to be very well versed in what the Bible does and does not say, for that I respect and admire you; however, I would like to see the verses you see that support a loving, monogamous homosexual relationship. There are numerous passages in the bible of Jesus loving various types of sinners. I don't see a passage that shows he loved a homosexual or even condoned it.

 

[Scotishfury09]

I don't mean to say that Jesus didn't love homosexuals or that they are inferior in any way, my fault, I should have phrased it differently. I just want to see where you find that the Bible allows for homosexuality.

 

[davedjy]

Davedjy, you seem to be very well versed in what the Bible does and does not say, for that I respect and admire you; however, I would like to see the verses you see that support a loving, monogamous homosexual relationship. There are numerous passages in the bible of Jesus loving various types of sinners. I don't see a passage that shows he loved a homosexual or even condoned it.

David and Jonathan clearly had a relationship, not sure if it was sexual, but the Bible says in Samuel how David had a love for Jonathan greater than that of women.

We don't need a same sex relationship to infer, when marriage was about inheritance, more than it was about an actual love relationship.

Rape victims are forced to marry their attackers in Deut., we know that is a scary marriage at best, so it's easy to concur w/the idea that gay marriage is blessed by God.

 

[david_x]

Rape victims are forced to marry their attackers in Deut., we know that is a scary marriage at best, so it's easy to concur w/the idea that gay marriage is blessed by God.

Attackers are forced to marry.

 

[Full_Moon]

You have yet to find me an example of a loving, monogamous homosexual relationship condemned. Even Leviticus is talking about a pagan orgy worship ritual, which is a ritual impurity. YOU are cherry picking the law, not me.

What makes you believe that leviticus or Paul in Romans are talking about pagan orgies? There is no basis to this claim other than speculation which is useless.

I was going to reason with you on why it is a fallacious argument that would base itself on no condemnation of such relationships in scripture. But why should I bother carrying on about it with you? I know very well that if you are proven wrong on one thing you will go to another. Later, when talking to someone else, you will again return to the same false argument I already exposed for you.

Sorry, but I must decline right now. The fallaciousness of an argument is a small point when morality is based upon ones own self. I'll go invest my energy where it will grow into something.

Cheers.

 

[david_x]

I don't know why we always have to come up with a condemnation when there is never a condoning of same sex marriages anyway.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Attackers are forced to marry.

Do you think the rape victim appreciates the attacker being forced to marry her???

 

[EnemyPartyII]

I don't know why we always have to come up with a condemnation when there is never a condoning of same sex marriages anyway.

Lots of things arent condoned in the Bible, but we do them anyway

 

[david_x]

Do you think the rape victim appreciates the attacker being forced to marry her???

I would know this how? On the same note you know she isn't how?

Lots of things arent condoned in the Bible, but we do them anyway

Examples, if you would.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

I would know this how? On the same note you know she isn't how?

This has GOT to be the most arrogant, or most naive statement I have ever read, if you are seriously suggesting that rape victims appreciate being forced to marry their assailant

Examples, if you would.

Of things not condoned in the Bible? Seriously? How about the use of anything more technologically advanced than forged iron? How about universal democratic suffrage? Teres 2 fairly significant ones to get you started

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Before anyone else suggests that rape victims would be all better if only that pesky rapist would marry her... you should read this, just for starters http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_rape_and_aftermath

 

[david_x]

This has GOT to be the most arrogant, or most naive statement I have ever read, if you are seriously suggesting that rape victims appreciate being forced to marry their assailant

You are twisting what the bible says. If they are found out THE MAN MUST MARRY/SUPPORT THE VICTIM.

Of things not condoned in the Bible? Seriously? How about the use of anything more technologically advanced than forged iron? How about universal democratic suffrage? Theres 2 fairly significant ones to get you started

Those things aren't considered wrong though.