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.
Then you must think God also created adulterers, no He didnt...
He created man and woman for a purpose and its the opposite purpose to homosexual.
Authoring a person and authoring their actions arent the same. I bore my children but i didnt bear their sins.
No He didnt as He created man and woman to be in faithful union. Matt 19. The sin entered through disobedience. Gen 3.Adulterers are people. Therefore God created them.
He didn't create homosexual people that fact tells you He didnt. He created man and woman for a purpose and it’s the opposite purpose to homosexual.That's as may be, but that doesn't change the fact that God created homosexual people.
Dear Stumpjumper,
Ok so you think the Bible as truth is arguable? I don’t think a Christian can think say the Bible isn’t true and that and I am a Christian
But as I said I am referring you to the Bible not my interpretation or exegesis, you are attributing the Bible passages to me. I dint write the Bible.
Then you must think God also created adulterers, no He didn’t, nor did He create homosexuals.
No one has denied that His purpose for most people, is a heterosexual marriage. But that is not His purpose for all people. The Bible testifies that His purpose for some people is celibacy. THe created man and woman for a purpose and it’s the opposite purpose to homosexual. I am not denying God created man and woman, but you are in denial that He created them to be united.
You cherry pick with selective interpretation and eisegesis to form a falsehood.
Genesis 2 - “she shall be called 'woman, for she was taken out of man. For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.”
Matthew 19 – “Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,' and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'? So they are no longer two, but one.”
Its what the Bible says.
If you cant see what the creation accounts says about man and woman being created to be united, I don’t expect you would see anything about celibacy if it was there. Celibacy wasn’t a point raised by me.
stumpjumper said:Celibacy isn't mentioned either so that must also be a perversion as well, eh?
Phinehas2 said:
The NT teaching of Jesus Christ says it isn’t so why are you asking me. Read Matt 19. 1 Cor 7 etc.
God created him a man. His sexual orientation decision came much later.Well now you are shifting goalposts.
God still created Liberace as a homosexual man.
Not free will baptist. God created man and woman. They werent sinners when created. We are talking about the genesis account so no - God didnt create homosexuals or murderers or liars or rapists or pedophiles or adulterers etc.. He created man and woman period. The OP is talking about the genesis account remember? Sin came later - man and woman were initially created without sin in any form. God creates us not our actions again.Skipping your free-will Baptist (Arminianist) interpretation of God's relationship to humanity, that may all be well and good from your perspective and you're entitled to that opinion but I think that's still far from the scope of the OP.
Agreed. This has never been disagreed with.We may be able to choose many of our actions, but certainly not all and, regardless, God is still sovereign and acts over and above our actions.
God created man and woman in geneis without a sin nature - Sin nature came later. God created liberace the man not the choice of the man. Do you disbelieve that acting on homosexuality is a sin before God? The bible says it is. Do you disbelieve that it can be laid at the cross and a person can be cleansed of it? If you do then you doubt God is soveriegn and can clease us from sin.You could possibly argue that Liberace chose to have gay sex and yielded to his natural inclinations as a homosexual. I don't think many people would argue against that other than maybe hyper-Calvinists or strict determinists but, even then, God still created Liberace with that nature and he played a part in God's plan.
This is a false attempt to push homosexuality being a creation of God. Those who believe otherwise arent deists and all the false premises you want to pin on them. Are you ready to say CF has decided unless one believes that God creates some men to be gay then you are a deist? Ridiculous and you know it - you and everyone else here who has spoken to me more than 5 seconds as well as IAR know we arent deists - dualists and all the other false arguments one is using to try to fasely convince the church that gay is ok when its not.I don't believe that but thank you again for putting words in other people's mouths. It is, rather, the reductio ad absurdum to YOUR argument in regards to whether or not God could have logically created Liberace as a heterosexual that paints God as the author of sin. The problem lies within the framework of the OP's argument and your defense thereof that attempts to paint homosexuality and homosexuals as creations of man. You either wander into outright dualism, deism, or a variety of shades in between
The bolded portion is quite telling and backs what i said above.Sin is separation from God in a way (more specifically God's will) and on that I would mildly agree with your point. I wouldn't agree to the argument that homosexuality is necessarily or inherently sinful but, regardless, the ability to sin and hence sin itself is a creation of God.
False premise. There is no darkness in God.That does not mean that God authors sin, sins Himself (an oxymoron), or directly wills sin in man (all of which pretty much say the same thing) but God has, indeed, created sinners and hence sin.
You just can't get past the Sovereignty of God from a scriptural perspective:
English Revised Version Isaiah 45:7
I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil; I am the LORD, that doeth all these things.
Hmm that last part sounds new agey to me and not biblical there. We wont be creating this new earth - He will and it comes from above not here.God is working through us to bring about the new heavens and a new earth and that world is characterized by self-less love, equality among God's fellow creatures, and Shalom.
We can't remove the Sovereign God from the creative process though and though we may not understand we must have faith in God's will and seek that in this life...
He didn't create homosexual people.
I understand the use of the language, what you say is correct in that respect, but I believe the Bible is the truth there is no if for me.Stumpjumper is not "arguing" against the Bible, he is merely examining the logic of your syllogism, or lack of one.
Sorry but its not my interpretation that I have quoted it’s the NIV in most case, you still keep referring to the quoted NIV as my interpretation.No, you didn't write it, and your interpretation of it is no more infallible than anyone else's. Less so if the logic of your position does not hold up.
No-one created them, homosexuals and adulterers are just labels which associate people with activities contrary to the purposes God created them for.Then who created them?
yes they have, you have, there is no mention of heterosexual or homosexual in God’s creation, marriage is man and woman so there is no such thing as homosexual marriage or same-sex marriage in God’s creation, it’s a human disobedience to God’s purposes.No one has denied that His purpose for most people, is a heterosexual marriage.
Yes we know but it doesn’t countenance same-sex unions, it excludes and condemns them.The Bible testifies that His purpose for some people is celibacy.
So what? He said it to the disciples, are we disciples or Pharisees? And celibacy isn’t the issue, Jesus did countenance it along with man/woman union.Yes, when a man and a woman marry, they become one flesh. Jesus said nothing, about a person choosing celibacy for the gospel to the Pharisees, but waited until they left to mention it the disciples.
Impossible. If God created woman to be the companion with man He didn’t create man to be the companion with man. If Jesus NT teaching offers only celibacy as the alternative we can be sure you don’t believe the Bible.Becoming one flesh with a partner of the opposite sex is only one of the possible ways to align your life with God's plan.
Well if you read the citations I have given you can see I have said what you are claiming. Kindly address the scriptures.Because, as I indicated above, you stated that God's plan is for everyone to become one flesh with a person of the opposite sex.
Everyone isnt always "gay" or attracted to members of the same sex all of their lives - there are tons of instances where it happened later in life as stated by the people themselves and again if you read through the thread someone in my own household did the same. I know you wont agree but I asked them with my own mouth and I have been around many many gay people who i have also discussed it with.
Im willing to bet this known also but wishes to be denied because it flies in the face of the truth. God doesnt make people sin - they do it themselves.
The degree in which sexuality can change varies from person to person. The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health has said "For some people, sexual orientation is continuous and fixed throughout their lives. For others, sexual orientation may be fluid and change over time."[10] Research by Lisa Diamond has shown the sexual orientation is more fluid among bisexual women than lesbians.[11]
Kinsey himself avoided and disapproved of using terms like homosexual or heterosexual to describe individuals, asserting that sexuality is prone to change over time, and that sexual behavior can be understood both as physical contact as well as purely psychological phenomena (desire, sexual attraction, fantasy).
And there is no point in debating a blind person.
If you are going to pretend to understand legal argumentation, learn to spell "moot."
I think the search for a 'gay gene' is more a product of the tabloid press than any serious scientist!
The exploration of how genes affect our sexuality has to include all aspects of sexuality, you can't do science in isolation!!!
Just as it would be a fallacy to search for a 'blond gene' rather than to investigate the group of genes which control hair colour, so it is a fallacy to search for a single and separate 'gay gene'
Anyone with a fundamental understanding of genetics can see that... unfortunately it doesn't sell as many newspapers as the 'gay' spin does!
(and linking 'moot' and mutability shows a somewhat poor grasp of linguistics!)
ETA... nm, CaDan covered that one!
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?