Homosexuality is designed?
- Thread starter billwald
- Start date
justchristian
New member
Being homosexual isnt a sin, acting on it (sexually) is.
Justin (Wiccan)
New member
justchristian said:
Which is not really a response to the question posed in the OP.
It is an important point: the Bible says witches are to be killed, and makes no distinction over whether or not they cast spells.
SteveG.
New member
Homosexual orientation is the result of complex social/psychological and no doubt genetic
influences. People who suffer from the affliction should be treated with the same respect we accord
anyone else. However, social and religious influences will largely dictate to what extent it is
tolerated in any given community. This is due to some extent I believe to the innate human evolutionary instinct to survive and produce progeny. That being said, it must be noted that
homosexual behavior is always a choice, whereas the orientation is not. This is where the deeper and more serious questions arise as to morality and faith. I agree with the previous poster that the chosen behavior is sin though the orientation itself isn't.
influences. People who suffer from the affliction should be treated with the same respect we accord
anyone else. However, social and religious influences will largely dictate to what extent it is
tolerated in any given community. This is due to some extent I believe to the innate human evolutionary instinct to survive and produce progeny. That being said, it must be noted that
homosexual behavior is always a choice, whereas the orientation is not. This is where the deeper and more serious questions arise as to morality and faith. I agree with the previous poster that the chosen behavior is sin though the orientation itself isn't.
justchristian
New member
If homosexuality is genetic then its not a sin. (that's what the OP is getting at)
I think its important to note much our genetic code (the faults) are due to the fall (handicaps, defects, disease etc)
So if acting homosexual (again sexually) is a sin then God would not have originally coded man this way.
I think its important to note much our genetic code (the faults) are due to the fall (handicaps, defects, disease etc)
So if acting homosexual (again sexually) is a sin then God would not have originally coded man this way.
justchristian
New member
Actually concidering God male is quite an immature stance intellectually and spiritually.
justchristian
New member
Assuming God created man in paradise and did not originally intend for us to live in a fallen world with physical ailments(in this case genetic) then it stands to reason these defects manifested themselves with the other consequences of the fall.
justchristian
New member
Then I would say most Christians are spiritually and intelectually immature.
justchristian
New member
How else would I? We are dealing with christian creation...there isnt exactly another source. All I am saying is that if you accept how God did not intend man to be homosexual from creation, and the fall changed us genetically, then there is no reason not to assume the homosexual "defect" manifested in the fall.
servent101
New member
All in all sin is trying to do something good - but falling short, or missing the target. The concept of sin as portrayed concerning homosexuality is simply a non-beneficial prognosis that more or less entraps a person to sin continually.
What is beneficial to all of us, is to live in harmony with the Universe, which takes every fiber of our being, with nothing held back - so lust is what? - lust is wanting to show and receive pleasure, but have we not been duped in believing that this activity of lusting will actually bring the pleasure we desire? I think so anyways, that lust is simply a distraction, something that keeps us from being able to focus and concentrate, and it also keeps us from viewing the opposite sex, or the same sex with pure intent. I personally do not make a big deal out of it though, and it is easy to get rid of if one is not inflicted with a guilt trip over one's lust. There are consequences to our behavior, consequences that cause us pain, and the pain is only there because if we cannot be motivated by good sense - what is the best, then we can either look around us and see other people doing certain things, and see what happens to them, or we can endure the pain ourselves, which is sometimes so severe that we do not recover, and we loose the "body" that we are presently in.
Anyways - yes God did make us this way, it is by Divine Design that if we do not seek a Spiritual Divine Connection with the "Cosmos" or God or some form of Spirituality that we seek something else, something less perfect, and that seeking something less perfect is missing the mark or falling short - other wise known as sin.
With Christ's Love
Servent101
What is beneficial to all of us, is to live in harmony with the Universe, which takes every fiber of our being, with nothing held back - so lust is what? - lust is wanting to show and receive pleasure, but have we not been duped in believing that this activity of lusting will actually bring the pleasure we desire? I think so anyways, that lust is simply a distraction, something that keeps us from being able to focus and concentrate, and it also keeps us from viewing the opposite sex, or the same sex with pure intent. I personally do not make a big deal out of it though, and it is easy to get rid of if one is not inflicted with a guilt trip over one's lust. There are consequences to our behavior, consequences that cause us pain, and the pain is only there because if we cannot be motivated by good sense - what is the best, then we can either look around us and see other people doing certain things, and see what happens to them, or we can endure the pain ourselves, which is sometimes so severe that we do not recover, and we loose the "body" that we are presently in.
Anyways - yes God did make us this way, it is by Divine Design that if we do not seek a Spiritual Divine Connection with the "Cosmos" or God or some form of Spirituality that we seek something else, something less perfect, and that seeking something less perfect is missing the mark or falling short - other wise known as sin.
With Christ's Love
Servent101
justchristian said:
I would have to agree with you
I was on a local board years ago. A woman kept saying, "God wants us to be happy, and she..."
The Christians responded: "God is NOT a female!! God is a HE. He is called Father!!"
I said, "Now, come on. You don't think that God has a penis, do you??"
They were offended that I would suggest such a thing, and I was reprimanded. But that is how we classify male and female - with sex organs. You look at the baby, and say, "It's a boy!"
I believe that the Creator is both male and female.
But patriarchal societies would never be subjected to anything female (not even God.)
And females are not considered just weak, but often, lesser than, men.
Matthew 1 doesn't mention a single woman.
The whole idea of female priests and pastors is still controversial.
People want to believe that God is male.
The difficult concept of "design" is that simply because one cannot come up with a reason, one suggests that it was never meant to be.
What is the "design" of mosquitos? They make you itch, and suck your blood. Did God "design" them to annoy us?
What is the purpose of an infertile human? They certainly can't reproduce, so what is their purpose?
What is the purpose for those that go into the priesthood, and pledge celebacy? They can't reproduce, so why would they do such a thing?
If you look at it from a reproductive stance, gay people seem not part of the plan - nor do people who marry when they are too old to bear children, infertile people, etc.
But I believe that everyone still has something to contribute, and they are here for a reason.
One can't look at design from only one point of view.
What is the "design" of mosquitos? They make you itch, and suck your blood. Did God "design" them to annoy us?
What is the purpose of an infertile human? They certainly can't reproduce, so what is their purpose?
What is the purpose for those that go into the priesthood, and pledge celebacy? They can't reproduce, so why would they do such a thing?
If you look at it from a reproductive stance, gay people seem not part of the plan - nor do people who marry when they are too old to bear children, infertile people, etc.
But I believe that everyone still has something to contribute, and they are here for a reason.
One can't look at design from only one point of view.
Agape4Robin
Member
Gender is strictly physical characteristics.beanieboy said:I would have to agree with you
I was on a local board years ago. A woman kept saying, "God wants us to be happy, and she..."
The Christians responded: "God is NOT a female!! God is a HE. He is called Father!!"
I said, "Now, come on. You don't think that God has a penis, do you??"
They were offended that I would suggest such a thing, and I was reprimanded. But that is how we classify male and female - with sex organs. You look at the baby, and say, "It's a boy!"
I believe that the Creator is both male and female.
But patriarchal societies would never be subjected to anything female (not even God.)
And females are not considered just weak, but often, lesser than, men.
Matthew 1 doesn't mention a single woman.
The whole idea of female priests and pastors is still controversial.
People want to believe that God is male.
God is always addressed as Father by Jesus. Father is always male in context.
Females are considered weak? By whose definition? Yours? If you say the bible, then you misinterpret those passages, as many men have done before you.....but if you think that God sees women as weak, try reading about the woman in Proverbs 31:10-31, or read the story of Ruth or Debra (in Judges). And what does Matthew 1 have to do with anything other than establish the patriarchial lineage of Christ?
God in essence is male. It is what it is....get over it!