Yahweh hates wickedness ... is it ever good ?

[Quartermaine]

If that's the case, then no homosexual act is justified.

by the same token no heterosexual act is justified.



what ever that means

 

[Aussie Pete]

this does nothing to change the fact that everything Jack said is true.

The only people that God will not change are those who do not want to be changed. That applies to whatever the sin that binds a person.

 

[Quartermaine]

The only people that God will not change are those who do not want to be changed. That applies to whatever the sin that binds a person.

the fact remains - everything Jack posted is true

 

[grasping the after wind]

leaving aside the question of just how do you know what goes on in American prisons re read the first sentence of Jack's post: "I would suggest that his "conversion" was able to change his sexual behaviour for a time but his sexual orientation remained unchanged."

I would submit that behavior is the only thing anyone wishes to change.

 

[Quartermaine]

I would submit that behavior is the only thing anyone wishes to change.

But the only way to do that is to convince the person through years of abuse to lie to everyone including themselves.

 

[Sketcher]

by the same token no heterosexual act is justified.



what ever that means

Nope, the species has to propagate.

 

[Quartermaine]

Nope, the species has to propagate.

That means heterosexual sex two or at best three times in the course of a lifetime. Worse it means no need for your "internal desire".

 

[grasping the after wind]

But the only way to do that is to convince the person through years of abuse to lie to everyone including themselves.

One does not need to lie to change one's behavior. I love to eat candy. I know it is not what I should eat based upon my belief system. I stop eating candy. I still would love to eat candy but I refrain from eating candy and eat broccoli instead. I am in no way lying nor has anyone had to abuse me for years for me to come to the decision that I will change my behavior based upon beliefs.

 

[Quartermaine]

One does not need to lie to change one's behavior. I love to eat candy. I know it is not what I should eat based upon my belief system. I stop eating candy. I still would love to eat candy but I refrain from eating candy and eat broccoli instead. I am in no way lying nor has anyone had to abuse me for years for me to come to the decision that I will change my behavior based upon beliefs.

Do you really think having a butterscotch in any way like orientation?

 

[Sketcher]

That means heterosexual sex two or at best three times in the course of a lifetime. Worse it means no need for your "internal desire".

No, actually. People often have more than three children, and can never really know if their children are going to grow up. Much less so before modern medicine became widely available. That, and heterosexual sex within the context of marriage is explicitly allowed in Scripture. Homosexual sex on the other hand is never allowed in Scripture, and any claim that the act is separate from the orientation affirms the Biblical teaching that homosexual sex is a choice, and that is a choice that is never allowed.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

One does not need to lie to change one's behavior. I love to eat candy. I know it is not what I should eat based upon my belief system. I stop eating candy. I still would love to eat candy but I refrain from eating candy and eat broccoli instead. I am in no way lying nor has anyone had to abuse me for years for me to come to the decision that I will change my behavior based upon beliefs.

Good/ Wonderful !

and a direct contrast compared to the worldly - in the world are many liars, and conditions that are associated with lying constantly. (drug addiction may be the most known and admitted example of this, but it is not by far the only one) ....

Simply from Scripture, believers immersed in Jesus' Name are to "stop lying to one another" .... and some people in some conditions are unable to do that, it seems at least, unless they become new creations by Jesus Grace, and their 'condition' changes, God Willing ....

 

[Quartermaine]

No, actually. People often have more than three children, and can never really know if their children are going to grow up. Much less so before modern medicine became widely available. That, and heterosexual sex within the context of marriage is explicitly allowed in Scripture. Homosexual sex on the other hand is never allowed in Scripture, and any claim that the act is separate from the orientation affirms the Biblical teaching that homosexual sex is a choice, and that is a choice that is never allowed.

it also means no sex at all for anyone who is infertile and any who engage in it are sinning horribly

 

[Sketcher]

it also means no sex at all for anyone who is infertile and any who engage in it are sinning horribly

No, Scripture does not teach that. The allowance for heterosexual sex within marriage is not restricted to people who are considered likely to be fertile. There is no allowance within it for homosexual sex at all, ever, though.

 

[Quartermaine]

No, Scripture does not teach that. The allowance for heterosexual sex within marriage is not restricted to people who are considered likely to be fertile. There is no allowance within it for homosexual sex at all, ever, though.

nice double standard. you just demonstrated that it has nothing to do with propagation, or even the ability to have children. its about justifying hate

 

[Sketcher]

nice double standard. you just demonstrated that it has nothing to do with propagation, or even the ability to have children. its about justifying hate

Nope, not justifying hate. Just the Biblical standard.

 

[Quartermaine]

Nope, not justifying hate. Just the Biblical standard.

holding a bible doesn't magically turn hate into something else.

 

[Sketcher]

holding a bible doesn't magically turn hate into something else.

True, but it's not hate that I'm talking about.

 

[grasping the after wind]

Do you really think having a butterscotch in any way like orientation?

No, I think one biological imperative is similar to another biological imperative. The internal drives we instinctually have that are there to ensure survival are very much alike. I think how one responds to any biological imperative whether the need to eat or the need to have sexual commerce depends upon one's willingness to control one's desires and whether one honestly sees any reason to control them. As human beings and not purely instinctual animals, we are able to consider the consequences of our actions and decide on what courses of actions we will take and refuse to take based upon multiple criterion and not just our instinctual desires. if one decides that one's well being would not be best served by giving in to one's instinctual desire then one has the ability to refrain from giving in. A person that does not consider their instinctual desire to be in conflict with one's well being would not consider refraining. A person that decides that one's well being is not as important to one as one's instinctual desire will not refrain. There are many reasons to do something or to refrain from doing something but having an overwhelming desire to do that thing does not in itself preclude one from refraining. Therefore if I have an overwhelming desire to eat chocolate candy( I don't have such a feeling toward butterscotch btw), I have the choice of giving in to that desire or not. If I give in it will be because I honestly see no harm in satisfying the desire or I prefer satisfying my desire, at least in that moment, to my well being. If I refrain it will be because I believe that giving in to my desire will be detrimental to my well being in some way.

 

[Quartermaine]

True, but it's not hate that I'm talking about.

if it looks like a duck....

 

[Quartermaine]

No, I think one biological imperative is similar to another biological imperative. The internal drives we instinctually have that are there to ensure survival are very much alike. I think how one responds to any biological imperative whether the need to eat or the need to have sexual commerce depends upon one's willingness to control one's desires and whether one honestly sees any reason to control them. As human beings and not purely instinctual animals, we are able to consider the consequences of our actions and decide on what courses of actions we will take and refuse to take based upon multiple criterion and not just our instinctual desires. if one decides that one's well being would not be best served by giving in to one's instinctual desire then one has the ability to refrain from giving in. A person that does not consider their instinctual desire to be in conflict with one's well being would not consider refraining. A person that decides that one's well being is not as important to one as one's instinctual desire will not refrain. There are many reasons to do something or to refrain from doing something but having an overwhelming desire to do that thing does not in itself preclude one from refraining. Therefore if I have an overwhelming desire to eat chocolate candy( I don't have such a feeling toward butterscotch btw), I have the choice of giving in to that desire or not. If I give in it will be because I honestly see no harm in satisfying the desire or I prefer satisfying my desire, at least in that moment, to my well being. If I refrain it will be because I believe that giving in to my desire will be detrimental to my well being in some way.

if only love and commitment and a deep meaningful relationship with another were biological imperatives