Okay I have just had an interesting but maybe fallible thought.

SonicBOOM · Jan 24, 2008

BeckyH said:
Okay, I will share with you, I don't want any heated debates though.

This thought is about homosexuality.

I waas just thinking about whether homosexuality is wrong or not, I don't think the issue of homosexuality is mentioned in the Bible, but I maybe wrong,maybe Paul mentioned it?

But anyway, there is nothing that condemns homosexuality in the ten commandments and there is nothing in the two commandments that Jesus gave us that condemns it.

Jesus instructs is to "Love your neighbour as you love yourself", this commandment fulfills all. Being homosexual does not disobey this commandment so how is it worng , but murder, stealing, etc does.

I know that the OT condemns homosexuality in Leviticus, but there are loads of other little things that the OT condemns like women having their hair short.

Anyway, like I said this is just a thought I had and I could be wrong.

So I am waiting . Remember I don't want any attacks, I just want a pleasant and friendly debate.

The ten commandments are the major laws, but than there are other sublaws and homosexaulity is mentioned as a sublaw and quite a few times if I remember correctly. And yes.... in the NT Paul mentions it quite a few times to.

HOWEVER despite popular beleif the bible DOESN'T list it as a major sin and PAul lists it in the same list as disrespecting your parents. I don't think the issue is as extreme as Christains make it. the bible preaches against it but it isn't super important. Heck even sex itself is not mentioned as much as our protestant freinds seem to mention it.

dluvs2trvl · Jan 24, 2008

ladybug1980 said:
No offense intended (although it might be taken) but that is a fallacious argument against homosexuality.

if two heterosexual people cannot have a child, does that invalidate their relations?

You know what - it is not a fallacious argument and I'm pretty tired of seeing all the posts in here saying that it is...

No matter the amount of medical procedures done, medical intervention tried or prayers offered up two penises having sex with each other CANNOT EVER biologically reproduce...just as two vaginas having sex with each other CANNOT EVER biologically reproduce.

God created reproduction to happen between a MAN and a WOMAN. That is why our genders have specific body parts created to fit together - one with an egg and one with sperm - that is how reproduction happens.

Yes, there are heterosexual couples that cannot reproduce. However that is a totally different situation and has absolutely NO bearing whatsoever on the discussion of homosexuality.

Markus6 · Jan 24, 2008

mrkram said:
knowingly involving yourself in an act that will ensure the extinction of the human race if all partook in it exclusively emcompasses a morality aspect. I have no qualms with homosexual people but suggesting that there is no morale issue involved with the reproductive position of homosexuality is illogical.

Paul was single encouraged everyone to be as well. If we all did that (and didn't have sex) the human race would be extinct.

A guy at my old church had a different view. He thought we should make sure we out breed the pagans.

BattlescarGalactica · Jan 24, 2008

Let people live their own lives. As long as they're happy, productful citizens, then what does it matter? How is someone else's private life any of my business at all?
If someone has purple hair, I might think, "Idiot", but does that make me right and them wrong? No. Everyone has freedom of choice. At least in America. Judging people on their sexuality is just like judging them on the color of their hair- It's their life, let them live it... If I have a problem with them, then it's really only my problem, isn't it?

SonicBOOM · Jan 24, 2008

Markus6 said:
Paul was single encouraged everyone to be as well. If we all did that (and didn't have sex) the human race would be extinct.

A guy at my old church had a different view. He thought we should make sure we out breed the pagans.

1 Cor 7: 32-38

32I would like you to be free from concern. An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord's affairs—how he can please the Lord. 33But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world—how he can please his wife— 34and his interests are divided. An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord's affairs: Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world—how she can please her husband. 35I am saying this for your own good, not to restrict you, but that you may live in a right way in undivided devotion to the Lord.
36If anyone thinks he is acting improperly toward the virgin he is engaged to, and if she is getting along in years and he feels he ought to marry, he should do as he wants. He is not sinning. They should get married. 37But the man who has settled the matter in his own mind, who is under no compulsion but has control over his own will, and who has made up his mind not to marry the virgin—this man also does the right thing. 38So then, he who marries the virgin does right, but he who does not marry her does even better.

Paul wasn't encoureging people to be single, infact he commanded people to get married if they honestly wanted to but he says that married people are often divided with their priorities and they carry alot of "Worldly weight". In other words a single man frees himself up to focas more time on God and his will. A married man has to divide himself between his wife and God. This is why Paul says "a man who marries does what is right, but a man who doesn't marry does even better". The issue isn't even about singleness, it's about devotion to God and how much time we can give him. A married man carries alot of weight on him, while a single man is much more free. The key phrase in this passage is at the very begining where Paul says "I would like you to be free from a concern"

Lady Bug · Jan 24, 2008

dluvs2trvl said:
You know what - it is not a fallacious argument and I'm pretty tired of seeing all the posts in here saying that it is...

No matter the amount of medical procedures done, medical intervention tried or prayers offered up two penises having sex with each other CANNOT EVER biologically reproduce...just as two vaginas having sex with each other CANNOT EVER biologically reproduce.

God created reproduction to happen between a MAN and a WOMAN. That is why our genders have specific body parts created to fit together - one with an egg and one with sperm - that is how reproduction happens.

Yes, there are heterosexual couples that cannot reproduce. However that is a totally different situation and has absolutely NO bearing whatsoever on the discussion of homosexuality.

Let me clarify even if it still end up in disagreement.

I believe it is a fallacious argument if that is the only argument you give against homosexuality. For the record, I think other arguments against homosexuality should be made besides (and, in addition to, if you would like) the inability to reproduce, because it is a sad fact of life that some heterosexual couples cannot reproduce.

I'm not sure if it is hard to see what I am saying.

Yes, there are heterosexual couples that cannot reproduce. However that is a totally different situation and has absolutely NO bearing whatsoever on the discussion of homosexuality.

I think we are saying the same things, but in different words.

dluvs2trvl · Jan 24, 2008

ladybug1980 said:
Let me clarify even if it still end up in disagreement.

I believe it is a fallacious argument if that is the only argument you give against homosexuality. For the record, I think other arguments against homosexuality should be made besides (and, in addition to, if you would like) the inability to reproduce, because it is a sad fact of life that some heterosexual couples cannot reproduce.

I'm not sure if it is hard to see what I am saying.

I think we are saying the same things, but in different words.

Thanks for clarifying...I agree that it is not the only argument against homosexuality. I was just tired of seeing people saying that it was no argument at all.

Tinkerbell33 · Jan 24, 2008

Luther073082 said:
Lev 18:22

"'Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable."

Matt 5:17 ""Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."

Law is still law. This isn't a procedural law, this isn't a dietary law, and this isn't a punishment. This is clear straight out morality statement.

All the things you are thinking about are procedural laws. Morality laws are not abolished.

Yeah but Leviticus also says not to do lots of other little things which many christians now see as unimportant.

SonicBOOM · Jan 24, 2008

BeckyH said:
Yeah but Leviticus also says not to do lots of other little things which many christians now see as unimportant.

Luther has a point. There were diffrent catigories of laws and Jesus was talking about morelity laws when he said "not a single stroke of pen will be abolished until heaven and earth pass first"

Tinkerbell33 · Jan 24, 2008

Masked_Chris said:
Luther has a point. There were diffrent catigories of laws and Jesus was talking about morelity laws when he said "not a single stroke of pen will be abolished until heaven and earth pass first"

Yeah I understand that and he made a very good point that I actually agree with, but what I want to know is why is it wrong if it doesn't harm anyone?

Christian Soldier · Jan 24, 2008

SoAmazinglyBlessed said:
If infertility is right, then why can't infertile couples reproduce?

You won't win any awards for good logic with that statement.

Engaging in homosexual acts is a CHOICE. A choice condemned by both the Old and New Testaments.

Infertile women do not choose to be infertile. It is a physical condition they are afflicted with, which is why so many of them go to medical doctors in hopes their problem can be corrected.

Luther073082 · Jan 24, 2008

BeckyH said:
Yeah but Leviticus also says not to do lots of other little things which many christians now see as unimportant.

Yes because they are procedural, dietary, or punishment laws. Not morality laws.

Blank123 · Jan 24, 2008

i'm suprised in this entire thread no one has posted the NT verses against homosexuality

Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God. - 1 Cor 6:9-11

24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, 25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 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. - Romans 1:24-27

3 As I urged you when I went into Macedonia—remain in Ephesus that you may charge some that they teach no other doctrine, 4 nor give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which cause disputes rather than godly edification which is in faith. 5 Now the purpose of the commandment is love from a pure heart, from a good conscience, and from sincere faith, 6 from which some, having strayed, have turned aside to idle talk, 7 desiring to be teachers of the law, understanding neither what they say nor the things which they affirm.
8 But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully, 9 knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 10 for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine, 11 according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God which was committed to my trust. - 1 Timothy 1:3-11

Tinkerbell33 · Jan 24, 2008

Luther073082 said:
Yes because they are procedural, dietary, or punishment laws. Not morality laws.

Okay.

Tinkerbell33 · Jan 24, 2008

little_tigress said:
i'm suprised in this entire thread no one has posted the NT verses against homosexuality

Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God. - 1 Cor 6:9-11

24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, 25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 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. - Romans 1:24-27

3 As I urged you when I went into Macedonia—remain in Ephesus that you may charge some that they teach no other doctrine, 4 nor give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which cause disputes rather than godly edification which is in faith. 5 Now the purpose of the commandment is love from a pure heart, from a good conscience, and from sincere faith, 6 from which some, having strayed, have turned aside to idle talk, 7 desiring to be teachers of the law, understanding neither what they say nor the things which they affirm.
8 But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully, 9 knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 10 for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine, 11 according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God which was committed to my trust. - 1 Timothy 1:3-11

Thanks for the references. That has made things a bit clearer.

SonicBOOM · Jan 24, 2008

BeckyH said:
Yeah I understand that and he made a very good point that I actually agree with, but what I want to know is why is it wrong if it doesn't harm anyone?

I think C.S. Lewis says some good points about this matter *goes and grabs "meer Christainity"

"When a man says about something he wants to do, 'It can't be wrong because it doesn't do anyone else any harm'..... He is thinking it does not matter what his ship is like inside provided that he does not run into the next ship....... What good is telling the ships how to steer so as to avoid collisions if, in fact, they are such crazy old tubs that they cannot be steered at all? What good is drawing up, on paper, rules for socail behavor, if we know that, in fact our greed, corardice, ill temper, and self-conceit are going to prevent us from keeping them? [C.S. Lewis, Meer Christainity]

this is why Jesus tells us to clean the INSIDE of a cup and not the outside.... because socail morelity is only the tip of the iceberg. It may not harm anyone else but it harms yourself both in body and soul. And you will edventully cause the entire fleet of humans to steer in the completely wrong direction. What happens if an entire culture considers theivery right behavor? Their actions would never harm any person because they all beleive that theivery is right..... but it still does damage to their souls and spirits.

Luther073082 · Jan 24, 2008

From Chapter III Section D of "The moral and theological beliefs of Kirk (aka Luther073082)

Naturally we can find many laws in the old testiment and they are many. However some of these laws though useful to understand do not apply to our everyday life. For example we do not stone those who blaspheme the name of God (Lev. 24:14) It is helpful to understand the law in three ways. These ways are Morality Laws, Punishments, and Procedural laws.

When one reads the old testiment you can often see all three. A morality law is often stated as Thou shalt not and tells people what they shouldnt do because it angers God. For example in Lev. 26:1 it states 'Do not make idols or set up an image or a sacred stone for yourselves, and do not place a carved stone in your land to bow down before it. I am the LORD your God. Another good way to tell these is God calls upon himself by saying I am Lord or I am the Lord your God as if to conjure up his own authority behind these laws.

The second type of law is punishments. These are pretty easy to tell, as they are the proscribed punishments for people who do not follow Gods law. Many of these often involve stoning as God being a righteous judge needs to punish our disobedience. For example earlier the proscribed punishment for blasphemy was stoning.

The third type is procedural law. This law often involved offerings or clean and unclean. I would also count dietary laws in here but they could be regarded as separate. Procedural law sets up procedures for Gods holy people in Israel to carry out their day to day business of both state and religion.

It is important to note that a lot of these laws including the clean and unclean are often notable as they also accomplish a function of protecting his people who have no knowledge of science or disease. For example in Lev 7:19, God commands us to get rid of meat that has touched anything that is unclean. It is also important to note that the Romans did have this kind of knowledge.

Jesus however fulfilled the law but he did not abolish it (Matt 5:17). This means that the morality still applies. However Jesus took the punishments for our sins already and therefore it is meaningless and acting not out of forgiveness to punish a person caught in sin. (Note: Only in religious terms, the most Christians agree the state must punish people to protect others). This is confirmed in John 8:1-11.

Procedural and dietary laws are also of no use to our daily lives either. Procedural laws out of simple logic that we are not any longer the Holy nation of Israel. Plus based off of the fact that Christ was offered up as our perfect lamb, there is no need to sacrifice or give burnt offerings. Dietary laws are also of no daily use to the modern Christian as God has overwritten them in Matt 15:10-11, Mark 7:18-19, Acts 10:15, Acts 11:9, Romans 14:20.

Anyone who upholds the old procedural laws and dietary laws commits a moderate error in faith.

Anyone who upholds old punishment laws is committing a grave error.

Anyone who does not uphold all morality laws of both the gospels and the law is in grave error.

HannahBanana · Jan 24, 2008

soccerdad66 said:
Where does it say that a fat person will never enter the kingdom of heaven? Each sin carries it own weight, and each person is going to be accountable to God for their own actions. The problem I have is when someone justifies it and then misleads others, which may prevent them from entering the kingdom of heaven.

I also wouldn't lump depressed people in with that group. Who chooses to be depressed?

Don't get me wrong, I have had good friends who are gay, and I know God loves them just as much as he loves me, and I'm no more or less a sinner then they are.

And I'm not trying to convince you that you are wrong, that isn't going to happen, but I am saying wha the bible says, if you choose to interpret it differently, then that's your right.

So you honestly believe that people choose to be gay? If so, then you're dead wrong. Here's proof:

American Psychological Association said:
Is Sexual Orientation a Choice?
No, human beings can not choose to be either gay or straight. Sexual orientation emerges for most people in early adolescence without any prior sexual experience. Although we can choose whether to act on our feelings, psychologists do not consider sexual orientation to be a conscious choice that can be voluntarily changed.

(source)

And no, the APA is not a biased source, so don't try to say that it is.

Tamara224 · Jan 24, 2008

Not only is the Bible clear about the fact that homosexuality (by which I mean the practice of homosexual sex) is a sin, it also says that homosexuality is a judgment in and of itself.

Paul told us in the book of Romans that because people knew God but did not honor Him as God, God gave them over to their own lusts so that they would be dishonored in their bodies:

Romans 1:21-32
21For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22Professing to be wise, they became fools,
23and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.
24Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them.
25For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
26For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural,
27and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. 28And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper,

29being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips,
30slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents,
31without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; 32and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.

So, there is absolutely no need for Christians to attempt to heap condemnation on the heads of homosexuals. They are already receiving the just punishment.

We need to show them how they can be saved. And watch ourselves, lest we fall into the same error.

HannahBanana · Jan 24, 2008

dluvs2trvl said:
Yes, there are heterosexual couples that cannot reproduce. However that is a totally different situation and has absolutely NO bearing whatsoever on the discussion of homosexuality.

How is that a totally different situation, though?

Okay I have just had an interesting but maybe fallible thought.

SonicBOOM

Guest

What You See Is What You Get!

Veteran

Member

SonicBOOM

Guest

Thankful For My Confirmation

What You See Is What You Get!

Well-Known Member

SonicBOOM

Guest

Well-Known Member

QUESTION EVOLUTION

κύριε ἐλέησον χριστὲ ἐλέησον

Legend

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

SonicBOOM

Guest

κύριε ἐλέησον χριστὲ ἐλέησον

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency