If one is "born gay" how do you explain ex-gays?

[God's Truth]

I know exactly what the Bible is.




That is not true. It is not an instruction book. It is not even a book. It is a collection of records, poetry and letters, written over the course of thousands of years, by men under the inspiration of God. The various components had and have a wide variety of purposes.

Your characterization of the Bible is a bit, shall I say, childlike, to put it politely.

You are ridiculous. You say the Bible isn't a book. The word 'bible' means book.

It is an instruction book.

 

[God's Truth]

I won't be judged by someone like you who is obviously stunted in their ability to understand the issue.

I'm just trying to help you. You are a false judge, and a false teacher.

You are a horrible person telling someone they sounded drunk.

Now you won't even reply in a serious manner to a decent post of mine.

 

[God's Truth]

There might be transgender and homosexual people who are mentally ill and they do sexual perverse things, but that does not make the thing that they do as being a mental illness.

 

[Trump Gurl]

There might be transgender and homosexual people who are mentally ill and they do sexual perverse things, but that does not make the thing that they do as being a mental illness.

Can you explain why same sex attraction was listed as a mental disorder by the American Psychological Association for decades, and then all of a sudden they changed their minds?

 

[Derf]

I know exactly what the Bible is.




That is not true. It is not an instruction book. It is not even a book. It is a collection of records, poetry and letters, written over the course of thousands of years, by men under the inspiration of God. The various components had and have a wide variety of purposes.

Your characterization of the Bible is a bit, shall I say, childlike, to put it politely.

I'm not sure how "stupid, drunken child" is putting it politely. I guess because you didn't yet use @ok doser's "big stinky poopy head". But you're well on your way.

Do the insults make your posts seem more intelligent to you? Because they're having the opposite effect on everybody else.

Just saying...

 

[Trump Gurl]

Okay, last post for me: The only reason I posted in this thread is because the term "ex gay" was being talked about, and I tried to say that since same sex attraction is a mental disorder there can be no such thing as an "ex gay".

But now all these wannabe Bible experts are trying to tell me nonsense about the Bible, and I decided to look through some of your older posts and I can say confidently that you don't know jack about the Bible, either one of you. It's lit man.

So there you go. I'm chillaxin at home and don't feel like arguing. Believe what you want to.

 

[God's Truth]

Can you explain why same sex attraction was listed as a mental disorder by the American Psychological Association for decades, and then all of a sudden they changed their minds?

Maybe because they didn't want to insult the gays.

Isn't that more of a question you need to answer since you are on the side of the scientist?

 

[ok doser]

Can you explain why same sex attraction was listed as a mental disorder by the American Psychological Association for decades, and then all of a sudden they changed their minds?

it's a fascinating example of political lobbying and pressuring of those empowered to make the change, and was the source of a great deal of controversy among members of the APA at the time - I encourage you to research it and learn more on your own: https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf=...4dUDCAc&uact=5

 

[Trump Gurl]

Can you explain why same sex attraction was listed as a mental disorder by the American Psychological Association for decades, and then all of a sudden they changed their minds?

Maybe because they didn't want to insult the gays.

Isn't that more of a question you need to answer since you are on the side of the scientist?

I said that post #206 would be my last post but I will answer you since you are answering my question. You are right, it was all political. My point in asking you the question was to show you that it always was considered a mental disorder and it would still be considered a mental disorder if it were not for politics. Therefore, as I have have been saying all along, it is a mental disorder.

I will say one thing though that you might like: Even though it is a mental disorder they are still bound by God to overcome it and not have homosexual sex. This means they have a great trial before them, and rather than hating on them or wanting to make them criminals like some idiot wants to do in another thread, we must make it so our message reaches them louder than society's message does. And for that to happen we must speak the language of Love, not judgmentalidm.

Can you explain why same sex attraction was listed as a mental disorder by the American Psychological Association for decades, and then all of a sudden they changed their minds?

it's a fascinating example of political lobbying and pressuring of those empowered to make the change, and was the source of a great deal of controversy among members of the APA at the time - I encourage you to research it and learn more on your own: https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf=...4dUDCAc&uact=5

That post is the winner.

 

[God's Truth]

I said that post #206 would be my last post but I will answer you since you are answering my question. You are right, it was all political. My point in asking you the question was to show you that it always was considered a mental disorder

Just because the mentally ill do it doesn't make it a mental disorder. The mentally disabled might do it, but you can't say that the practice itself is mental illness.

and it would still be considered a mental disorder if it were not for politics. Therefore, as I have have been saying all along, it is a mental disorder.

Then you would have to say other sexual sins are just mental illness, such as adultery and fornication.

Then murder and stealing and lying are all just mental illness too, and that means you make God a mean God who goes against the poor mentally disabled.

I will say one thing though that you might like: Even though it is a mental disorder they are still bound by God to overcome it and not have homosexual sex.

Except for what, the more severe mentally disabled who need medication and then are still not able to stop with some behaviors?

This means they have a great trial before them, and rather than hating on them or wanting to make them criminals like some idiot wants to do in another thread,
we must make it so our message reaches them louder than society's message does. And for that to happen we must speak the language of Love, not judgmentalidm.
.

We have to judge all things, and in a non hypocritical way. We have to make righteous judgments.

 

[Derf]

Okay, last post for me: The only reason I posted in this thread is because the term "ex gay" was being talked about, and I tried to say that since same sex attraction is a mental disorder there can be no such thing as an "ex gay".

But now all these wannabe Bible experts are trying to tell me nonsense about the Bible, and I decided to look through some of your older posts and I can say confidently that you don't know jack about the Bible, either one of you. It's lit man.

So there you go. I'm chillaxin at home and don't feel like arguing. Believe what you want to.

Interpretation: "Nobody's agreeing with me. I'm taking my ball and going home."

The problem is that you jumped into the conversation without any sort of reference, evidence, support or anything else except "it's true because I say it's true", and "if you don't agree with me your either drunk, stupid, or childish".

Why would anyone listen to you? Do you want to offer credentials or references or something that explains why what you say can be believed/trusted? Without that, you're just another idiot writing in a forum loaded with idiots who are trying to foist your opinion off as gospel truth.

The whole point of Theology Online is to discuss Christian beliefs, compared either to other religions or to science or to atheism or even to different sects of Christianity. But comparison means finding the truth among lies. Stating something over and over again, stating something with capital letters, stating something with an insult attached--none of these are authoritative, and they make you look like a fool trying to look smart and failing badly.

Don't just take your ball and go home. Learn to converse with people politely; learn to offer your opinion as opinion instead of fact; learn to offer evidence to back up your opinion. Or just show us that you are God, since offering your opinion without some other kind of support is claiming to be THE authority on the subject.

 

[rocketman]

I was asserting that some Christians that know do not answer to the Mosaic Laws.

I am not sure what you mean by this answer, so I will say, the Mosaic law was for the Jew, not the Greek or Gentile if you will. The Mosaic law was fulfilled upon the life, death, & resurrection of Jesus Christ, the new covenant was struck. Though the law will never pass away, it is there to show us our inability to follow it, and that the release from the burden of sin is through the redemption of Christ's sacrifice for salvation. Again I am asking you if you are asserting that those that belong to the Body of Christ are "required" to follow the Mosaic law?

So you would not like to live in Pastor Enyart's kind of American Constitution then, is that right?

I am not aware of Pastor Enyart's stance on the American Constitution so, it would be unfair for me to comment on it.

And although you are above the Law you keep to Laws mostly laid down by Paul, is that right?

Above the Law? Hardly...Set free from it's burden of sin & death by the blood of Christ would be a more accurate description, which is the exactly what is described in the New Testament.

Romans 8:1 Consequently, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and death. 3 For what was impossible for the law, in that it was weak through the flesh, God did. By[a] sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and concerning sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, 4 in order that the requirement of the law would be fulfilled in us, who do not live according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

Does the above mean that it's OK for same sex couples to live in peace, and be left alone in peace?

I believe that homosexuality & sexual immorality has been around since the fall of mankind, just as an entire laundry list of humankind's sin has existed, I do not approve of it yet, I do not believe hostility towards those who are mired in their sin is helpful to sharing the Gospel that can set them free from their sinful condition. People need to see redemption from sin, not condemnation from those that claim to be ambassadors for Jesus Christ so... Acceptance...NO...Understanding...Yes. I think that the open acceptance of this lifestyle on a societal level is detrimental to society as a whole, and that used to be the normal reaction but, society has been, and is in moral decline, a lot of things have been normalized in the process, this decline will continue until the 2nd advent of Christ. this is not an acceptance, just an understanding of how Gods Word conveys what the eventual ending to this story is.

 

[JudgeRightly]

I am not aware of Pastor Enyart's stance on the American Constitution so, it would be unfair for me to comment on it.

See https://kgov.com/constitution.

I believe that homosexuality & sexual immorality has been around since the fall of mankind, just as an entire laundry list of humankind's sin has existed, I do not approve of it yet, I do not believe hostility towards those who are mired in their sin is helpful to sharing the Gospel that can set them free from their sinful condition. People need to see redemption from sin, not condemnation from those that claim to be ambassadors for Jesus Christ so... Acceptance...NO...Understanding...Yes. I think that the open acceptance of this lifestyle on a societal level is detrimental to society as a whole, and that used to be the normal reaction but, society has been, and is in moral decline, a lot of things have been normalized in the process, this decline will continue until the 2nd advent of Christ. this is not an acceptance, just an understanding of how Gods Word conveys what the eventual ending to this story is.

See https://kgov.com/homo.

 

[rocketman]

See https://kgov.com/constitution.



See https://kgov.com/homo.

If you have something to say than say it JudgeRightly, this site is for dialog not link dropping...or at least it used to be.

 

[JudgeRightly]

If you have something to say than say it JudgeRightly, this site is for dialog not link dropping...or at least it used to be.

You do realize, do you not, first of all, that I'm a moderator and am well aware of the rules, and second of all, that TOL and Kgov are now run by the same people, right? Which means that the rule about link dropping (which is against links to other FORUMS, so it doesn't apply anyways) does not apply.

For the first link, you said you were not aware of what Pastor Enyart thought of America's constitution. The link I posted, had you just clicked on it, was to correct your assumption that eider was talking about America's CURRENT constitution, to that eider was talking about Bob's PROPOSED constitution of America, which can be found at said link.

The the second link, again, had you just clicked on it, would have directed you to Kgov's response to the homo claims of "we just want to be left alone," which argument is the same one eider just made.

I was trying to help you out. So please, don't shoot the messenger.

 

[eider]

I am not sure what you mean by this answer, so I will say, the Mosaic law was for the Jew, not the Greek or Gentile if you will. The Mosaic law was fulfilled upon the life, death, & resurrection of Jesus Christ, the new covenant was struck. Though the law will never pass away, it is there to show us our inability to follow it, and that the release from the burden of sin is through the redemption of Christ's sacrifice for salvation. Again I am asking you if you are asserting that those that belong to the Body of Christ are "required" to follow the Mosaic law?

Which part of 'I know Christians whop tell me that they do not follow the Mosaic KLaws' did you not get?
You would need to ask them any questions about that, surely?

I am not aware of Pastor Enyart's stance on the American Constitution so, it would be unfair for me to comment ...... on it.

It's the very first thread in the Politics section.
Read up on it.

Above the Law? Hardly...Set free from it's burden of sin & death by the blood of Christ would be a more accurate description, which is the exactly what is described in the New Testament.

Romans 8:1 Consequently, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and death. 3 For what was impossible for the law, in that it was weak through the flesh, God did. By[a] sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and concerning sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, 4 in order that the requirement of the law would be fulfilled in us, who do not live according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

Ah......... Yes ........... Paul has written about following Jesus the Christ.
But I studied as much of the life (and times) of Jesus as I could and never read about that from him.
I acknowledge your belief....... fair enough?

I believe that homosexuality & sexual immorality has been around since the fall of mankind, just as an entire laundry list of humankind's sin has existed, I do not approve of it yet, I do not believe hostility towards those who are mired in their sin is helpful to sharing the Gospel that can set them free from their sinful condition. People need to see redemption from sin, not condemnation from those that claim to be ambassadors for Jesus Christ so... Acceptance...NO...Understanding...Yes. I think that the open acceptance of this lifestyle on a societal level is detrimental to society as a whole, and that used to be the normal reaction but, society has been, and is in moral decline, a lot of things have been normalized in the process, this decline will continue until the 2nd advent of Christ. this is not an acceptance, just an understanding of how Gods Word conveys what the eventual ending to this story is.

I believe that sexual drives have varied in humans since the start, but as long as those who are prejudiced against LGBT lifestyles keep their beliefs and opinions to themselves, then, no problem. But if or when minority groups become harassed, victimsed or subdued by self-righteousness in any way, then all of a community should rise up to bring law-and-order to any such attacks.

For me, the one condition which shows how different our sexuality can be is 'Asexuality' and I have known a few asexual men and women in my lifetime...... who clearly do not fit with heterosexual characteristics. If folks can accept that condition, then they can accept the rest, as far as I am concerned.

The Churches which now support LGBT followers and their lifestyles are now are in full view here (UK) but the more extreme churches seem to be falling away. Maybe that's God's will?

 

[Derf]

I believe that sexual drives have varied in humans since the start, but as long as those who are prejudiced against LGBT lifestyles keep their beliefs and opinions to themselves, then, no problem.

Why do those who disagree with LGBT lifestyles have to be the ones to keep their beliefs and opinions to themselves, if LGBTs are allowed to offer their own beliefs and opinions?

Going back to the murder comparison, that's like saying murderers are allowed to give their opinion about murder, but those who disagree are forbidden from discussing it. That's what happens in a society where right has already been chosen, and is never allowed to change. You're arguing against yourself again, eider, since you go for the morality by majority model.

 

[quip]

Why do those who disagree with LGBT lifestyles have to be the ones to keep their beliefs and opinions to themselves, if LGBTs are allowed to offer their own beliefs and opinions?

Because there would be no need for the latter if the former would simply tend to their own biz (glass house).

See how that works?

 

[Derf]

Because there would be no need for the latter if the former would simply tend to their own biz (glass house).

See how that works?

That's an opinion. My opinion is that there IS a need, and that it IS tending to my own biz. You're in the same glass house, quip.

And determining whose opinion should hold sway is the exact same moral dilemma you and eider are trying to prevent anti-LGBTs, if you'll allow the term, from joining the discussion.

Again, if you say anyone who is against murder is NOT allowed to voice their opinion about whether murder should be legal, murder will become legal, because murderers will have the final (and only) say.

 

[eider]

And determining whose opinion should hold sway is the exact same moral dilemma you and eider are trying to prevent anti-LGBTs, if you'll allow the term, from joining the discussion.

Oh, we would support anybody's rights to free expression and opinion, so long as it does not incite crime, harassment, victimization, fears etc.
Shout your mouth off.....if you must.

Again, if you say anyone who is against murder is NOT allowed to voice their opinion about whether murder should be legal, murder will become legal, because murderers will have the final (and only) say.

You cannot help it, it seems. Why is it that Anti-LGBTs (your name for yourself) construe sexuality beside murder, or pedophilia? So extreme....