Where is the record of God creating Homosexuals in the Creation Account?

[CaDan]

That is a choice you have made---to fudge words. What does God say about such arguments?

1 Timothy 6:3-5
Some people may contradict our teaching, but these are the wholesome teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ. These teachings promote a godly life. Anyone who teaches something different is arrogant and lacks understanding. Such a person has an unhealthy desire to quibble over the meaning of words. This stirs up arguments ending in jealousy, division, slander, and evil suspicions. These people always cause trouble. Their minds are corrupt, and they have turned their backs on the truth. To them, a show of godliness is just a way to become wealthy.



We all know what God means about "homosexual"...the situation is, of course, that there are those here who refuse to accept what God thinks, and they prefer their own wicked thoughts on the matter. You don't know better than God...you are called to serve Him.

"We all know" nothing based upon the passage quoted in the OP.

Stop using Scripture to insult people.

 

[Angel4Truth]

That is a choice you have made---to fudge words. What does God say about such arguments?

1 Timothy 6:3-5
Some people may contradict our teaching, but these are the wholesome teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ. These teachings promote a godly life. Anyone who teaches something different is arrogant and lacks understanding. Such a person has an unhealthy desire to quibble over the meaning of words. This stirs up arguments ending in jealousy, division, slander, and evil suspicions. These people always cause trouble. Their minds are corrupt, and they have turned their backs on the truth. To them, a show of godliness is just a way to become wealthy.

"We all know" nothing based upon the passage quoted in the OP.

Stop using Scripture to insult people.

to respond to bolded quote portion -2 Timothy 3:16. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,
17. that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

See also :


1 timothy 5:20. Those who are sinning rebuke in the presence of all, that the rest also may fear.

2 timothy 4: 2. Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching.
3. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; 4. and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables.


There is a difference between Godly rebuke and correction and insult. If the scripture is considered an insult its most likely thats conviction and not offense.

 

[Texas Lynn]

We all know what God means about "homosexual".

There is no evidence "god" ever expressed a thought on the matter of sexual orientation.

..

there are those here who refuse to accept what God thinks

You, and everyone else, are in no position to know what God thinks so to state any argument as such is to base it on a false premise.

No mortal can know the mind of god. Ancient texts can not be shown to indicate the mind of God so much as that of TPTB of the era.

 

[CaDan]

[/B]

to respond to bolded quote portion -2 Timothy 3:16. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,
17. that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

See also :


1 timothy 5:20. Those who are sinning rebuke in the presence of all, that the rest also may fear.

2 timothy 4: 2. Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching.
3. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; 4. and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables.


There is a difference between Godly rebuke and correction and insult. If the scripture is considered an insult its most likely thats conviction and not offense.

My point remains--the OP posited exactly one passage to support her position and those who support her conclusion that Teh Geh Is Teh Bad!!11!!! have moaned and whined that discussion of any other Scripture or any other reasoning is off-topic and should be deleted as against the Rules of this site. I find such hypocritical argument pathetic.

Speaking of sound doctrine, the tacit Gnosticism argued in this thread is pretty far from sound doctrine.

But what's a little heresy when you can find another way to beat up on Teh Gehy? Am I right?

 

[Angel4Truth]

My point remains--the OP posited exactly one passage to support her position and those who support her conclusion that Teh Geh Is Teh Bad!!11!!! have moaned and whined that discussion of any other Scripture or any other reasoning is off-topic and should be deleted as against the Rules of this site. I find such hypocritical argument pathetic.

Speaking of sound doctrine, the tacit Gnosticism argued in this thread is pretty far from sound doctrine.

But what's a little heresy when you can find another way to beat up on Teh Gehy? Am I right?

My scripture was to counter your claim that scripture is being used as insult. If one is insulted by scripture - then one should consider that perhaps its conviction and not insult. The gnostic deist etc.. claims here are off topic strawman to detract from the simple fact AGAIN - that temptations and actions arent creations of God - they are actions - people are created - not what they do after they are created - actually its much more of a heresy to imply that a Holy God is the author of sin when we are.

Quite frankly I think its one of the sickest things ive ever seen that anyone calling themselves a christian would rather attribute sin to God than owning up to themselves being the sinner.

I also think its pretty sick and shameful to see staff trying to bully people into agreeing that gay is ok with God by calling them names and accusing them of less than being christian if they wont agree. But i dont see anyone cleaning up THOSE posts.

 

[IamRedeemed]

The passages of Scripture in the OP CLEARLY demonstrate GOD'S intended purpose for mankind. It is a fact that any and every deviation from that plan AFTER the fall IS NOT OF GOD.

Yes, that includes ANYONE who commits pedophilia, who engages in sexual activity with beasts, fornicates (has sexual relations with anyone outside of a marriage covenant) those who commit adultery, (which is those who are married but commit fornication with another who is not their husband or wife) and yes that includes gays, because in God's perspective there is NO SUCH THING as a marriage covenant before Him that consists of anything other than a man and woman, as is CLEARLY indicated in the Creation account which was PRIOR to SIN.

My point remains--the OP posited exactly one passage to support her position and those who support her conclusion that Teh Geh Is Teh Bad!!11!!! have moaned and whined that discussion of any other Scripture or any other reasoning is off-topic and should be deleted as against the Rules of this site. I find such hypocritical argument pathetic.

Speaking of sound doctrine, the tacit Gnosticism argued in this thread is pretty far from sound doctrine.

But what's a little heresy when you can find another way to beat up on Teh Gehy? Am I right?

 

[CaDan]

The OP creates such an ontological mess that is is almost impossible to discuss. There are a great many things in the universe that are not mentioned in the second creation account. Yet, of course, those things exist.

We are left with a conundrum. Either there are things not created by God, or the second creation account is incomplete. I choose the latter prong.

Choosing that prong, however, seems to drive some folks into a rather nasty state, and results in the classic attack passages against false teachers being dragged out for the same dour dance of outrage. The same lines are drawn, the same tired arguments trotted out.

Remember--the question posed in the OP was not related to a behavior or a sin or anything other than people. I detest sloppy argumentation because it leads to junk like this thread. The OP is sloppy argumentation. As an advocate for the anti-gay side, I invite you to reject that argumentation because it only makes your side look bad.

 

[Criada]

Of course there was no disease before the fall either....
So, presumably cancer patients don't exist either?

 

[IamRedeemed]

It is quite disgusting to say the very least.

My scripture was to counter your claim that scripture is being used as insult. If one is insulted by scripture - then one should consider that perhaps its conviction and not insult. The gnostic deist etc.. claims here are off topic strawman to detract from the simple fact AGAIN - that temptations and actions arent creations of God - they are actions - people are created - not what they do after they are created - actually its much more of a heresy to imply that a Holy God is the author of sin when we are.

Quite frankly I think its one of the sickest things ive ever seen that anyone calling themselves a christian would rather attribute sin to God than owning up to themselves being the sinner.

I also think its pretty sick and shameful to see staff trying to bully people into agreeing that gay is ok with God by calling them names and accusing them of less than being christian if they wont agree. But i dont see anyone cleaning up THOSE posts.

 

[IamRedeemed]

Irrelevant.
The argument isn't "do gays exist"?
If it was, your statement wouldn't be the non sequitur that it is.

Of course there was no disease before the fall either....
So, presumably cancer patients don't exist either?

 

[Angel4Truth]

Of course there was no disease before the fall either....
So, presumably cancer patients don't exist either?

Cancer and all death and disease is a result of a fallen sinful world. The existance of sin has tarnished it all. Cancer is not a person - disease is not a person - God created creation in the creation account without sin and without death and disease. There was a promise that those things would come with disobedience but it wasnt created that way. I know you all get the point by now but keep pretending you dont.

Its much better to be like adam at the fall and say the 'woman that YOU created did this" like many of you He attrtibuted HIS own sin to GOD. The pride of the FLESH - SIN IN ACTION. Same thing is happening here instead of repenting and admitting ones sin and being cleansed from it.

 

[Criada]

Cancer and all death and disease is a result of a fallen sinful world. The existance of sin has tarnished it all. Cancer is not a person - disease is not a person - God created creation in the creation account without sin and without death and disease. There was a promise that those things would come with disobedience but it wasnt created that way. I know you all get the point by now but keep pretending you dont.

Its much better to be like adam at the fall and say the 'woman that YOU created did this" like many of you He attrtibuted HIS own sin to GOD. The pride of the FLESH - SIN IN ACTION.

Um... is it even worth saying....
Homosexuality is not a person!

 

[Angel4Truth]

Exactly the point- homosexuality isnt a person unless several of you are willing to say that without sexuality you are nothing. Sexuality doesnt make a person a person.

 

[Angel4Truth]

God created everything in the world including adam and eve without sin.

WE brought sin into the world.

 

[IamRedeemed]

On the contrary. The OP which consists mostly of Scripture is
very CLEAR. What is a mess is the sinful, reprobate minds of man.

Yes, we all know that CaDan is the judge of all things....not.
Quit harassing people. If you can't lend anything useful to the
conversation then the solution is for you to refrain from participating at all.

The OP creates such an ontological mess that is is almost impossible to discuss. There are a great many things in the universe that are not mentioned in the second creation account. Yet, of course, those things exist.

We are left with a conundrum. Either there are things not created by God, or the second creation account is incomplete. I choose the latter prong.

Choosing that prong, however, seems to drive some folks into a rather nasty state, and results in the classic attack passages against false teachers being dragged out for the same dour dance of outrage. The same lines are drawn, the same tired arguments trotted out.

Remember--the question posed in the OP was not related to a behavior or a sin or anything other than people. I detest sloppy argumentation because it leads to junk like this thread. The OP is sloppy argumentation. As an advocate for the anti-gay side, I invite you to reject that argumentation because it only makes your side look bad.

 

[Angel4Truth]

If you can't lend anything useful to the
conversation then the solution is for you to refrain from participating at all.

Amen!

 

[tulc]

The thread is designed to demonstrate there is no record of God creating homosexuals.

uhmmm then the thread has more problems then if gays can be Christians, because that means there are millions of people running around today that weren't created by God. Let's try the simple questions again:
1) Did God create people?
2) Are homosexuals people?
3) If God created people then He created the person who is a homosexual, right?
4) If God didn't create the person who is a homosexual who did?
I believe all these questions can be answered easily from the creation account in Genesis.
tulc(anyone want to take a shot at answering these questions?)

 

[Angel4Truth]

One more time - creation was created without sin. This thread is about the creation account. Only adam and eve were created in the creation account and neither of them were gay and Gods intention for mankind is shown by their creation.

Murderers- liars - rapists- etc.. have been born since then too but they werent created in Genesis by God in the creation account. Those are things the people born to adam and eve and their offspring - became because of sin.

Again keep acting like no one gets it - its not because they dont get it - its because to admit they get it would be to admit that God is not the author of sin and then that means one needs be repentant of their own sin. (which is the ideal and the point)

 

[CaDan]

The passages of Scripture in the OP CLEARLY demonstrate GOD'S intended purpose for mankind. It is a fact that any and every deviation from that plan AFTER the fall IS NOT OF GOD.

Well, let's take a look at the purpose in the passage, shall we?

v. 26: Having dominion over animals and fish and birds

v. 28: A repeat of having dominion and to be "fruitful and multiply."

That is all you get out of the first account.

In the portion of the second account quoted by you, we see no purposes at all. We see that Adam likes Eve more than the various animals presented to him by God, but that's about it.

Gen. 2:19-20: And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.​

The presentation of the animals to Adam as potential substitutes for Eve creates quite a mess for your reasoning. Presumably God wasn't fooling Adam and would have respected whatever choice he made. What would have happened if Adam had chosen, say, the elephant for a helper and companion? Considering God (in the second account) pulled the animals right out of the ground, we would perhaps see small humans grow like crops.

Be that as it may, we see nothing about any purpose other than making more humans, subduing the earth, and (in a section not quoted by you) managing the Garden of Eden. No music, no literature, no poetry. This will become important later.

Yes, that includes ANYONE who commits pedophilia, who engages in sexual activity with beasts, fornicates (has sexual relations with anyone outside of a marriage covenant) those who commit adultery, (which is those who are married but commit fornication with another who is not their husband or wife) and yes that includes gays, because in God's perspective there is NO SUCH THING as a marriage covenant before Him that consists of anything other than a man and woman, as is CLEARLY indicated in the Creation account which was PRIOR to SIN.

Of course, none of these things are mentioned at all in the two creation accounts. There is also no mention of a marriage covenant. That is a later understanding read back into the account.

In addition, as we can see in the second creation account with the presentation of the animals, Adam could have chosen a non-human companion.

Finally, as I indicated above, there are numerous things that humans do that are not listed in either of the creation accounts. By your rubric, those should be equally condemned. Things such as art and music and poetry are just as lacking in that account as pedophilia, bestiality, and fornication. Yet you do not condemn them.

Your claims of gnosticism and heresy are completely unsubstantiated and bogus. What is pathetic is that you cannot participate in a debate, (especially one where you know you have lost, the moment you go outside of God's Word), without resorting to nonsense to derail, strawmen, red herrings and ad hominem attacks, that's what I find pathetic.

Not an argument.

Grow up.

No.

 

[tulc]

Exactly the point- homosexuality isnt a person unless several of you are willing to say that without sexuality you are nothing. Sexuality doesnt make a person a person.

...uhmm then why do you keep arguing homosexuality is a person? That is the very argument CaDan, I and everyone you have been arguing against have been making since the first page. Think about it: God made people, gays are people God made gay people.
tulc(we can always use the help!)