Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 3

[Kdall]

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Congratulations Bruth, you just made "the list".
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3649754&postcount=3120

But I don't recall hearing a sodomite ever us the eunuch line before.

You are aware that a eunuch is a man that either has been castrated (usually done to someone who guarded the Queen) or whose testes never developed aren't you?
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/eunuch

A eunuch and a homosexual are completely different. There is no evidence that homosexuals are born that way but even if there were, that would only indicate that they were born with a genetic disorder. Having the proclivity towards something does not justify acting on that proclivity.

You two really should read a post in its entirety. You're just coming off stupid with what you said above.

I said that "born" eunuchs (to clarify for you two: that means from birth) is a term referring to homosexuals. It also refers to those born as hermaphrodites and to those with physical retardations that rendered them sterile. Jesus clearly states that there are eunuchs born that way.

Also in my earlier post I said that "congenital enuchs" in Jewish tradition was a term applied to homosexuals both male and female.

love: homosexuality is natural and has been proven to be, at the very least, partly due to genetic studies. The more closely related one is to a gay person, the more likely they themselves are gay. And gay behavior is on display by nearly all animal life, especially animals of higher intellect (think: dolphins, primates, your dog).

Saying it isn't natural is ignorant of science AND Christian faith in Jesus. You can still say it's a sin if you'd like, yet another thing I stated in my older post that you couldn't grasp then

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Post from Part 2 on Michael Jackson
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3479078&postcount=957

​

In spite of his celebrity and in spite of how easy it is for many to imagine him guilty of those terrible crimes, he was never convicted.

Neither was OJ Simpson (who was obviously framed on another crime hence being in prison and taking away his ability to go out and find the real murderer of his wife and her male friend).

I'm simply taking his lack of any legal guilt as evidence of the possibility that he was not a criminal. And if this is so, therefore his relationships with children were pure and so he may have only been a person who found great joy in the beauty of children, and felt happy and safe in their presence, like how many people feel the same toward their cat or bunny rabbit.

But by all means, pull out the one sentence in that post that was among the least interesting. :AMR1:

Borrowing the word that my widdle friend zoo22 likes to use quite often, your entire post was...

Creepy

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
I was kinda hoping we could talk about OT punishment.
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4276953&postcount=6853

When you'd like to be right, you will agree with me. :idunno: Your little horns are showing. :devil:

So your answer to my question would be:

"Yes, God wants a 12 year old boy who had been repeatedly raped by an older sodomite at the age of 6 and years later is caught in the act of sodomy, stoned to death"? (if you're going to use the OT penalty phase, you better use the OT method).

Too bad you wish to change God's law (Dan 7:25).

"Too bad." :chz4brnz: ~ Seth Brundle, The Fly

"Religious fanatics scare me to death" (aCW 4-2-15)

 

[Arthur Brain]

Connie, you and SD should have a one on one debate over this.

Crank V Fruitcake. Could be entertaining...

opcorn:

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Congratulations Bruth, you just made "the list".
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums...postcount=3120

But I don't recall hearing a sodomite ever us the eunuch line before.

You are aware that a eunuch is a man that either has been castrated (usually done to someone who guarded the Queen) or whose testes never developed aren't you?
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/eunuch

You two really should read a post in its entirety. You're just coming off stupid with what you said above.

I said that "born" eunuchs (to clarify for you two: that means from birth) is a term referring to homosexuals. It also refers to those born as hermaphrodites and to those with physical retardations that rendered them sterile. Jesus clearly states that there are eunuchs born that way.

Yet those few that were born sterile for some reason all had same sex desires? (One would think that at least a few would find women sexually attractive).

love: homosexuality is natural and has been proven to be, at the very least, partly due to genetic studies. The more closely related one is to a gay person, the more likely they themselves are gay. And gay behavior is on display by nearly all animal life, especially animals of higher intellect (think: dolphins, primates, your dog).

Saying it isn't natural is ignorant of science AND Christian faith in Jesus. You can still say it's a sin if you'd like, yet another thing I stated in my older post that you couldn't grasp then

Little Mattie Vines couldn't have said it better himself.

Back to eunuchs:

How does one pick them out in a crowd of let's say several hundred thousand?

 

[serpentdove]

"So your answer to my question would be: "Yes, God wants a 12 year old boy who had been repeatedly raped by an older sodomite at the age of 6 and years later is caught in the act of sodomy, stoned to death"? (if you're going to use the OT penalty phase, you better use the OT method)."

An 18 year old who is committing the crime of sodomy should be put to death (Lev 20:18).

Lev 18:22, 20:13, 1 Ki 14:24, Ro 1:24, 26, 27 :vomit:

"Religious fanatics scare me to death."

Your way leads to more: theft, murder and destruction (Ac 5:29). :reals: God's way leads to life and long living (Jn 10:10). :straight:

See:

God and the Death Penalty by Bob Enyart

Fanatic ~ Lecrae

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Connie, you and SD should have a one on one debate over this.

Crank V Fruitcake. Could be entertaining...

opcorn:

And not talk about what the LGBTQueer movement is currently doing? (molesting children; contracting all kinds of diseases, many of them deadly; harassing people of faith, etc. etc. etc.).

There is a reason why the death penalty was never given to those who engaged in homosexual acts (redemption).

That's not to say that those who commit capital crimes (murdering the innocence of children being one) aren't worthy of the death penalty.

Your thoughts on that Art?

 

[aCultureWarrior]

An 18 year old who is committing the crime of sodomy should be put to death (Lev 20:18).

Lev 18:22, 20:13, 1 Ki 14:24, Ro 1:24, 26, 27 :vomit:

And not 'gay youth'? (Someone is going soft).

 

[serpentdove]

Connie, you and SD should have a one on one debate over this.

Crank V Fruitcake. Could be entertaining...

opcorn:

Ec 8:11–12

 

[lovemeorhateme]

You two really should read a post in its entirety. You're just coming off stupid with what you said above.

I said that "born" eunuchs (to clarify for you two: that means from birth) is a term referring to homosexuals. It also refers to those born as hermaphrodites and to those with physical retardations that rendered them sterile. Jesus clearly states that there are eunuchs born that way.

Also in my earlier post I said that "congenital enuchs" in Jewish tradition was a term applied to homosexuals both male and female.

love: homosexuality is natural and has been proven to be, at the very least, partly due to genetic studies. The more closely related one is to a gay person, the more likely they themselves are gay. And gay behavior is on display by nearly all animal life, especially animals of higher intellect (think: dolphins, primates, your dog).

Saying it isn't natural is ignorant of science AND Christian faith in Jesus. You can still say it's a sin if you'd like, yet another thing I stated in my older post that you couldn't grasp then

I would posit that it is you who is a complete ignoramus when it comes to matters of both science and scripture. In the case of science, there is no proof that people are born homosexual. In the case of scripture, there is no justification for anyone acting on homosexual desires. People are born sinners with a desire to sin. Homosexuality is a sin. That does not mean that people are born homosexual, and the struggle of the homosexual is one of the struggle against sin. If a married man has the desire to cheat on his wife, that does not justify him doing so. The Bible is unequivocal in its condemnation of homosexuality, stop trying to justify it and twist the Bible to say what you want it to say.

You know, animals kill each other over mates too. The one who wins gets a mate. It's perfectly natural. It's found in many species after all. So why don't you lobby for the law to be changed? You could campaign for the right of humans to kill each other over sexual partners. After all, this is a perfectly logical extension of your argument that homosexuality is justified because it's a behaviour found in the animal kingdom.

Whether you want to call it a sin or not, you are using the very arguments used to justify sin. Not only are your arguments wrong, but as you can see from the logical outworking of what you say they are also morally reprehensible.

lain:

 

[MichaelCadry]

I just hate it when good ole fashioned mockery goes to blind eyes Mikey (you're anything but a homophobe, in fact you like many who claim to be a follower of Christ, are an ally of the homosexual movement. Look at your own words if you don't believe me).

I am saying I do not believe in gay marriage and that Civil Union should have to do. Marriage is between a man and a woman. Being gay is not necessarily a choice. Just like straight young boys grow up wanting straight sex, so do gay kids want gay sex. Coming out of the closet and proclaiming you're gay isn't easy at all. And because of society, (not now, but before) it was very hard to be gay and still be treated like you want to be treated. In other words, I am not too keen in being gay either. But for those who feel born this way, I am still going to forgive them and love them as I'd like to be loved myself. Jesus never dealt with gays, for whatever reasons. It would be nice if He had. Well, I loved a guy so much, I would have easily died in his place, regardless of whether we had sex or not. He was straight, so whatever. I still loved him more than anyone, except when he tried to put the make on my girlfriend Salli (at the time I was bi), I got mad at him. But I forgave him for it and we are still excellent friends. And even though I had a girlfriend and loved her tons, we never did have sex because we weren't married yet. I believed that you shouldn't have sex outside of marriage. That's how I was taught in Church. If Jesus forgave the adulteress, we should take His example, and not cast the first stone. I am still a virgin with women. What of it? I did want sex with my girlfriend, but an angel said to me: No, no, no! It was because I got horny about her at the time. You read Rev. 14:4 KJV). I don't have a choice, to be honest. At least, I do have God in my life, Who is able to forgive me and love me extremely much, and I have overcome having any sex with guys for years now. I abstain and I do it for Jesus, because I'd rather please God more than myself. I want what He wants for me.

Michael

There are opinions and there are facts. Regarding Jesus forgiving the thief:

Keep in mind that the thief was paying the penalty for the crimes that he had been convicted of. Jesus forgave him because of his repentance, but like the woman accused of adultery (who He let go because of the lack of evidence), Jesus Christ, the Son of God/God in the flesh, did not denounce Roman civil laws. God is not an anarchist.

When people behind the LGBTQueer/sexual anarchist movement are righteously punished for the atrocities that they're committing, I'll find room in my heart to forgive them. Until then, there is no room in my heart as it's overflowing with grief for the innocents that are murdered and physically, emotionally and spiritually molested by these proud and unrepentant perverts.[/QUOTE]

Men molest girls and women too. Does that mean you're going to say okay to straight sex? I don't hear anything from you regarding that. Both gays and heteros have molested children. Yes, I have repented because it was my time to do so. In heaven, there is no having sex. So I'm just ready earlier. That's all.

Praise God And Jesus,

Michael

 

[lovemeorhateme]

I am saying I do not believe in gay marriage and that Civil Union should have to do. Marriage is between a man and a woman. Being gay is not necessarily a choice. Just like straight young boys grow up wanting straight sex, so do gay kids want gay sex. Coming out of the closet and proclaiming you're gay isn't easy at all. And because of society, (not now, but before) it was very hard to be gay and still be treated like you want to be treated. In other words, I am not too keen in being gay either. But for those who feel born this way, I am still going to forgive them and love them as I'd like to be loved myself. Jesus never dealt with gays, for whatever reasons. It would be nice if He had. Well, I loved a guy so much, I would have easily died in his place, regardless of whether we had sex or not. He was straight, so whatever. I still loved him more than anyone, except when he tried to put the make on my girlfriend Salli (at the time I was bi), I got mad at him. But I forgave him for it and we are still excellent friends. If Jesus forgave the adulteress, we should take His example, and not cast the first stone.

Michael



There are opinions and there are facts. Regarding Jesus forgiving the thief:

Keep in mind that the thief was paying the penalty for the crimes that he had been convicted of. Jesus forgave him because of his repentance, but like the woman accused of adultery (who He let go because of the lack of evidence), Jesus Christ, the Son of God/God in the flesh, did not denounce Roman civil laws. God is not an anarchist.

When people behind the LGBTQueer/sexual anarchist movement are righteously punished for the atrocities that they're committing, I'll find room in my heart to forgive them. Until then, there is no room in my heart as it's overflowing with grief for the innocents that are murdered and physically, emotionally and spiritually molested by these proud and unrepentant perverts.

Everyone has a choice whether or not to act on their sinful desires. Everyone.Of course we need to love people who are caught up in sin, but as part of loving them we need to share the gospel with them, and the hope that is in Christ Jesus and warn them that if they don't repent and believe they won't make it to heaven. They will ultimately end up in hell. But I add the caveat that we must do this with gentleness and respect.

 

[alwight]

I would posit that it is you who is a complete ignoramus when it comes to matters of both science and scripture. In the case of science, there is no proof that people are born homosexual. In the case of scripture, there is no justification for anyone acting on homosexual desires. People are born sinners with a desire to sin. Homosexuality is a sin. That does not mean that people are born homosexual, and the struggle of the homosexual is one of the struggle against sin.

I simply can't accept that people are not at least innately sexual, all creatures instinctively desire to mate, it's the basic function of individuals that are otherwise expendable.
Having a specific sexual desire must surely be a part of our genetic makeup afaic, even if there is no actual proof.

If you don't take a strictly Biblical view for a moment then it seems to me at least that there is no reason at all to suppose that having a sexual desire at least must be an integral part of having a sexual apparatus in the first place. If mental traits indeed naturally evolved, along with everything else, then to assume that not having an inbuilt desire to use the sexual parts we were born with was the case, would be quite absurd imo.

There is all kinds of evidence that sexual orientation is innate, not least the testimony of almost anyone who is asked whether or not they can actually pick and choose to have sexual desires.
Homosexuals will in my experience typically confirm that this is just as true for them as anyone else.

You and many Christians will typically believe that the Bible determines what "sin" is, rather than accept what we were born with or nurture as a guide, which as you will probably admit yourself Pete, is rather more difficult if you do happen to be attracted to the same sex, right? :think:

 

[lovemeorhateme]

I simply can't accept that people are not at least innately sexual, all creatures instinctively desire to mate, it's the basic function of individuals that are otherwise expendable.
Having a specific sexual desire must surely be a part of our genetic makeup afaic, even if there is no actual proof.

If you don't take a strictly Biblical view for a moment then it seems to me at least that there is no reason at all to suppose that having a sexual desire at least must be an integral part of having a sexual apparatus in the first place. If mental traits indeed naturally evolved, along with everything else, then to assume that not having an inbuilt desire to use the sexual parts we were born with was the case, would be quite absurd imo.

There is all kinds of evidence that sexual orientation is innate, not least the testimony of almost anyone who is asked whether or not they can actually pick and choose to have sexual desires.
Homosexuals will in my experience typically confirm that this is just as true for them as anyone else.

You and many Christians will typically believe that the Bible determines what "sin" is, rather than accept what we were born with or nurture as a guide, which as you will probably admit yourself Pete, is rather more difficult if you do happen to be attracted to the same sex, right? :think:

I don't deny that people are innately sexual beings. However, I do not believe that people are born homosexual and contest that there is any evidence to prove otherwise.

That does not mean that I necessarily believe having homosexual feelings is a choice. It wasn't a choice for me and I know many others who would say the same but I believe there is a lot more psychology involved than people realise. In my case I believe that abuse coupled with other homosexual experiences as I was growing up contributed to this. It was then after I was told in school that this meant I was gay, this was my identity and I should just embrace it that I came to accept this label and do everything I could to live by it. I listened to their advice, accepted that I was gay and couldn't do anything about it. Not only that, but I was told it was wrong to try even if I wanted to.

Becoming a Christian didn't automatically take those desires away, though since then I have indeed been in love with a girl. Yet I've never denied this is something I still struggle with, but the difference is I now have a new identity in Christ. I am a new person, and every day I strive to live for him. He has forgiven me and gives me the strength to do what is right. If that means a life of celibacy so be it, if it is God's will.

So, no matter what one says about being born gay, I think that the issue is a lot more complicated than that. But even if one was born with homosexual desires, that would not excuse acting upon them. Acting on homosexual desires is a sin, as is acting on the desire to steal, lie, commit adultery etc.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

So, no matter what one says about being born gay, I think that the issue is a lot more complicated than that. But even if one was born with homosexual desires, that would not excuse acting upon them. Acting on homosexual desires is a sin, as is acting on the desire to steal, lie, commit adultery etc.

If we are made in God's image (Genesis 1:26), how can someone be born with sexual desires that He detests?

"What does it mean that humanity is made in the image of God?"

Morally, man was created in righteousness and perfect innocence, a reflection of God’s holiness. God saw all He had made (mankind included) and called it “very good” (Genesis 1:31). Our conscience or “moral compass” is a vestige of that original state. Whenever someone writes a law, recoils from evil, praises good behavior, or feels guilty, he is confirming the fact that we are made in God’s own image.

Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/image-of-God.html#ixzz3WCFnK7de

Don't fall for the 'born that way/gay gene' lies Pete, you know better than that.

 

[lovemeorhateme]

If we are made in God's image (Genesis 1:26), how can someone be born with sexual desires that He detests?

"What does it mean that humanity is made in the image of God?"

Morally, man was created in righteousness and perfect innocence, a reflection of God’s holiness. God saw all He had made (mankind included) and called it “very good” (Genesis 1:31). Our conscience or “moral compass” is a vestige of that original state. Whenever someone writes a law, recoils from evil, praises good behavior, or feels guilty, he is confirming the fact that we are made in God’s own image.

Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/image-of-God.html#ixzz3WCFnK7de

Don't fall for the 'born that way/gay gene' lies Pete, you know better than that.

If you read my previous posts, I've made clear that I don't believe that homosexuals are born that way. I certainly don't believe in any 'gay gene'. It seems you have selectively read and quoted from what I've written. What I was saying was hypothetically even if they were born that way, it would be no excuse for acting on those desires.

 

[serpentdove]

And not 'gay youth'? (Someone is going soft).

How old were these yoots? 2 Ki 2:23 :smokie:

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
If we are made in God's image (Genesis 1:26), how can someone be born with sexual desires that He detests?

"What does it mean that humanity is made in the image of God?"

Morally, man was created in righteousness and perfect innocence, a reflection of God’s holiness. God saw all He had made (mankind included) and called it “very good” (Genesis 1:31). Our conscience or “moral compass” is a vestige of that original state. Whenever someone writes a law, recoils from evil, praises good behavior, or feels guilty, he is confirming the fact that we are made in God’s own image.

Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/image-of...#ixzz3WCFnK7de

Don't fall for the 'born that way/gay gene' lies Pete, you know better than that.

If you read my previous posts, I've made clear that I don't believe that homosexuals are born that way. I certainly don't believe in any 'gay gene'. It seems you have selectively read and quoted from what I've written.

Then be consistent with what you write in other posts, because what you said here would mean that if God did indeed create some with homosexual desires, then it would be perfectly acceptable for them to act on them.

But even if one was born with homosexual desires...

What I was saying was hypothetically even if they were born that way, it would be no excuse for acting on those desires.

Why throw in an hypothesis when that can't be the case ? Either Holy Scripture is the infallible Word of God or it's not. Either we're made in God's image (created in righteousness and perfect innocence) or can be born with sinful desires (in which case homosexuality wouldn't be a sin if people were born with same sex deisres).

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
And not 'gay youth'? (Someone is going soft).

How old were these yoots? 2 Ki 2:23 :smokie:

In the scenario 12. Is there an age limit on repentance?

 

[alwight]

I don't deny that people are innately sexual beings. However, I do not believe that people are born homosexual and contest that there is any evidence to prove otherwise.

We are not perfect beings but it seems to me that our general purpose is to mate with the opposite sex which is why most of us seem to have an innate heterosexual orientation. But clearly it seems to me that our brains do not always apparently correspond with our physical attributes in some people.
I could argue that this in fact isn't actually anything gone wrong in terms of evolution at all, an arguably subtle evolutionary tactic that in some cases, the having of more males around is sometimes a benefit in raising their sister's children. But I can't argue against your Christian belief about what is supposed as "sin".

That does not mean that I necessarily believe having homosexual feelings is a choice. It wasn't a choice for me and I know many others who would say the same but I believe there is a lot more psychology involved than people realise. In my case I believe that abuse coupled with other homosexual experiences as I was growing up contributed to this. It was then after I was told in school that this meant I was gay, this was my identity and I should just embrace it that I came to accept this label and do everything I could to live by it. I listened to their advice, accepted that I was gay and couldn't do anything about it. Not only that, but I was told it was wrong to try even if I wanted to.

Well it could just be that you are gay and that experience didn't really alter that. I remember at school one boy who would get an erection in the showers after sport. The PE teacher seemed to think that corporal punishment on the spot was what was required. He wasn't allowed in the showers after that, but I don't think the boy even knew what it was all about or why it had happened, it just did, we are each what we are.

Becoming a Christian didn't automatically take those desires away, though since then I have indeed been in love with a girl. Yet I've never denied this is something I still struggle with, but the difference is I now have a new identity in Christ. I am a new person, and every day I strive to live for him. He has forgiven me and gives me the strength to do what is right. If that means a life of celibacy so be it, if it is God's will.

Not being religious or a believer I think that this is the only life we know we have. I think it would be more of a sin to deny one's own nature in favour of an ancient doctrinal belief devised by people probably rather more homophobic than my PE teacher was.

So, no matter what one says about being born gay, I think that the issue is a lot more complicated than that. But even if one was born with homosexual desires, that would not excuse acting upon them. Acting on homosexual desires is a sin, as is acting on the desire to steal, lie, commit adultery etc.

I'm not gay, I don't even remotely want to do the act that your religion deems a sin, so to me it all seems rather unfair and unreasonable.
I hope that the boy I mentioned above found a suitable partner in life and that they were both happy and unrepressed by the beliefs of others. lain: