Homosexuality Debates

Why don't people bother reading old posts...?

I'll C&P my original post...

"Yes, it mentions Chris Crocker, but it applies to homosexuality in general. It offers another interpretation of the Biblical passages commonly used in support of the theory that God condemns homosexuality."

And here's Part 2, as well...

Marielue, I believe all of your quotes except Corinthians are covered in that video. But no, malakos doesn't mean "a boy kept for homosexual relations with a man" - indeed, pederasty was quite open in Ancient Greece and not frowned upon at all. Malakos simply means "effeminate", but not in the same way as in English. To the Greeks, a man could either be "manly" or "effeminate" - there was no middle ground. Therefore, "effeminate" is not really a good translation. For example, a man who got sick easily and could not take much physical punishment would be deemed "effeminate", as were pacifists, or those who were scared of fighting. I think the point I make here is obvious.

On 31-May-2008 Catharsis said:

Why don't people bother reading old posts...?

I'll C&P my original post...

"Yes, it mentions Chris Crocker, but it applies to homosexuality in general. It offers another interpretation of the Biblical passages commonly used in support of the theory that God condemns homosexuality."

And here's Part 2, as well...

Marielue, I believe all of your quotes except Corinthians are covered in that video. But no, malakos doesn't mean "a boy kept for homosexual relations with a man" - indeed, pederasty was quite open in Ancient Greece and not frowned upon at all. Malakos simply means "effeminate", but not in the same way as in English. To the Greeks, a man could either be "manly" or "effeminate" - there was no middle ground. Therefore, "effeminate" is not really a good translation. For example, a man who got sick easily and could not take much physical punishment would be deemed "effeminate", as were pacifists, or those who were scared of fighting. I think the point I make here is obvious.

(Romans 1:26-27) ?For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections, for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature. And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another, men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet.?

God is referring to homosexuals here, and is calling them wicked. In the video you just showed it says that when we say that homosexuals shouldn't act upon how they feel, we are contradicting God's word, because we are implying that it would be better for him to be alone. No, we are, however, implying that he shouldn't go against their nature, just as God's word says. So its not contradicting God's word at all.

In part two is describing Naomi's loyalty to Ruth, not her love. It even says later in another chapture that Naomi had a husbend. Ruth is also married, and is infact, Naomi's niece, not wife....

And as for Johnathan and David they were just close friends, that grew in God's grace together. The Bible has often times in other verses, referrerd to david thinking of Johnathan as his brother, not as a husbend. And since when is leaving your parents, and living somewhere els considerd being with that person, if thats the case then perhaps all of the disciples of God are homosexuals. Furthermore David?s heterosexual feelings toward Bathsheba got him in deep trouble, in otherwords he liked girls. 1 Samuel 10:17 explains that David?s love for Jonathan was so great, because David loved Jonathan as much as he loved himself. In the New Testament, Jesus taught as the second greatest commandment that we are to love our neighbors as ourselves, so this proves nothing.

1 Samuel 18:3 does not mean he took off his clothes, but it was a custom for people when they make covenants to offer eachother a gift. Infact many warriors exchanged armor in token of their ancestral friendship, which I believe this was what David and Johnathen were doing. If the Bible wouldn't rule homosexuality as a sin (Romans 1: 26-27) then this would seem as far stretched as your interpretation seems, however the Bible does.

Oh and as far as Daniel and ashpenaz goes, the verse they gave was so far stretched as a translation, that I can't even debate it. The verse could mean many different things, and either ways, are stretched. However since the Bible points out (Romains 1: 26-27) that homosexuality is a sin, it is more logical to interpret the verse as ashpenaz showed mercy to Daniel.

Yeah no actually that made plenty of sense, considering the commandments were made after man.

I'm having trouble understanding the Christian mentality though; so you guys aren't Christians because you're afraid of an eternal afterlife of suffering, but you're Christians because, and basically, there is no life after death except through God?

Other than the life God has planned for you, you have no other choice? What about Satan? What about his plans? Or the opposite of God; surely God must have an opposite, or logically speaking God doesn't exist.

(in before "God precedes reason")

(also, sorry to hi-jack the thread, but it's a lot easier to ask someone rather than read the bible... seriously, this stuff is gibberish...)

On 01-Jun-2008 Fwank said:

Yeah no actually that made plenty of sense, considering the commandments were made after man.

I'm having trouble understanding the Christian mentality though; so you guys aren't Christians because you're afraid of an eternal afterlife of suffering, but you're Christians because, and basically, there is no life after death except through God?

Other than the life God has planned for you, you have no other choice? What about Satan? What about his plans? Or the opposite of God; surely God must have an opposite, or logically speaking God doesn't exist.

(in before "God precedes reason")

(also, sorry to hi-jack the thread, but it's a lot easier to ask someone rather than read the bible... seriously, this stuff is gibberish...)

Well first, before getting to your post frank, I just want to fix somthing in my last post. I was wrong, Ruth is Naomi's daughter in law, not neice. Again sorry about that, I didn't want to edit cause noone would probably have seen the edit.

Anyways moving on to frank....


I'm having trouble understanding the Christian mentality though; so you guys aren't Christians because you're afraid of an eternal afterlife of suffering, but you're Christians because, and basically, there is no life after death except through God?

Well first I am a christian, because some years back I was told how to get saved, and I excepted God's gift of salvation.

This is how you can become a christian, and verses from the Bible that back that up. I will also ask a series of questions so you can understand why its important, and actually may be some questions you are wondering.

Who is a sinner? You and I are, we all are.

For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;(Rom 3:23 KJV)

So I'm a sinner, why would that matter? Because you and I have sinned, we are condimed to hell after we die, unless we accept God's gift of salvation.

For the wages of sin is death;
but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.(Rom 6:23 KJV)



Gift? From God? To Sinners? Don't I have to change my ways first?

Yes God's gift was to all of us, when he died on the cross for all of us, he took are sin upon him. That we may be able to except his gift of salvation. And no, after you except God into your life, and except his gift of salvation, thats when the change will take place, you don't have to change anything before you get saved, the Bible says today is the day of salvation.

John 3: 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten son, that who so ever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.


But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.(Rom 5:8 KJV)



Christ died for sinners? Did he die for all sinners? Did he die for me? For all sinners.


For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
(Rom 10:13 KJV)



How do I call upon the name of the Lord? This is how.


That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
(Rom 10:9 KJV)

For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
(Rom 10:10 KJV)

So if I confess, that Jesus is Lord,and believe that he was raised from the dead, I'll be saved? It sounds too easy. Yes you will be saved, it is a gift.



For by grace are ye saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. (Eph 2:8,9 KJV)

That is the plan of salvation, and if you havn't excepted God's gift of salvation, then when you die, you are not going to heaven, but rather hell. So that answers you're question on whether the only after life is through God, no its not you are either going to heaven orhell when you die. That is the christian prespective of it.



Other than the life God has planned for you, you have no other choice? What about Satan? What about his plans? Or the opposite of God; surely God must have an opposite, or logically speaking God doesn't exist.


Yes God does have a opposite, and it is infact, satan. All satan is trying to do is decieve manknd, so they that they may not go to heaven. The reason why he does this is because he is jealous og God, and even said in the Bible that he would become higher then God. All through the Bible it shows satan as being a deciever, and a jealous angel, even in the beggining of genesis when he decieved adam and eve. So why would I want to be apart of a plan that leads to hell? I wouldn't.


but it's a lot easier to ask someone rather than read the bible... seriously, this stuff is
gibberish

Indeed the Bible is hard to understand, but the more and more you read it, the more and more you will understand verses. The Bible all goes together, each verse backs up another verse, or has history that you would have to know in order to understand a certain verse. So the more and more you read the Bible, and about the Bible, the more and more you will understand what it is saying. However you will never be able to understand every verse right off the batt, you still need to do research on some verses.

And I have trouble understanding some of the verses in the Bible as well. I just encourage you and beg you to read the Bible/read up on the Bible, and give it a chance, as you have givin other theory's a chance. I'm not asking you to do this to try to act smarter then you or somthing, however, I'm begging you because God loves you, and died on the cross for you, and has a plan in your life as well.

So anyways that is the Biblical view of the questions you just asked.

That is the plan of salvation, and if you havn't excepted God's gift of salvation, then when you die, you are not going to heaven, but rather hell. So that answers you're question on whether the only after life is through God, no its not you are either going to heaven orhell when you die. That is the christian prespective of it.

I do love the fact that there is no middle ground, a person whos only sin is the fact that they are human is in the same boat as a mass murderer who refuses to repent, doesn't sound like a fair deal to me. On to a little issue I know there is quite a bit of debate about but by that explaination babies that are born but die straight after birth are going to hell, since they can't ask for God's forgiveness but they have already sinned.

I'm begging you because God loves you, and died on the cross for you, and has a plan in your life as well.

If God loves us so much then why does he continue to let the world suffer? If he loves us why doesn't he act when people pray to him for help, to save their familys from disease, war etc? He does nothing to help us yet expects us to do everything for him.

Also just a thing I've never understood but if Jesus died on the cross for our sins then doesn't that mean we don't have to worry about them since our sins have already been taken care of?

Back more to the homosexuality part I was wondering is there anywhere in the bible where it gives a full decription of what it classes as a man? Since as far as I'm aware there isn't, so if a man became a woman (the full sex change) and then went with a man would that still be considered gay by the bible?

but it's a lot easier to ask someone rather than read the bible... seriously, this stuff is gibberish

Just get like a kids bible, its all the fun of the bible in an easy to understand package

« Last edited by super craig on Jun 2nd 2008 »

Yeah, maybe I should talk about this in another thread, considering mari isn't capable of giving simple answers.

Sorry for the hi-jack cathy D=

For the record, I was referring to the old testament, written in Hebrew, which is literally gibberish to me. I've read much of the translated texts of the genesis and other "stories" gospels which I found entertaining, however devastatingly contradictory in terms of consistency and rationality (that was my impression, actually, so don't go quoting me on that and asking me to give you solid examples...)

Too many questions I want to ask now, but not doing it in this thread, and not asking you anymore @_@

(again, sorry cathy ><)

I agree with gay marriage and all that this is a free country they should have the rights there like everybody else just different and like the opposite gender it's just like you if you think eww there together they probably think the same of you and the opposite gender of you so i go for it

I don't think religion should have to interfere with gay rights. Just because someone believes that its wrong doesn't mean you can tell they what they can and can't do.
I think that for some, its a choice, for others not a choice.

I'm going to resurrect this thread, because most of the ones on page 1 are... well, rubbish. The world ending in 2012? Honestly, how are you meant to seriously debate that?

So, anyway, can anyone actually come up with a non-religious reason why homosexuality is wrong? Because it's easy to just say "It's wrong because the Bible says so" - it also conveniently gets you out of backing yourself up properly. If your religion says that it's "wrong", or "sinful", then why? Is it hurting anyone? (note: I don't mean "emotional hurt" caused by people hating/fearing homosexuality, because that can happen with almost anything - being a Christian, being an atheist, voting Republican... It doesn't make something wrong.) If you don't have a reason for calling something "sinful", then what right do you have to prevent people from doing it?

"So, anyway, can anyone actually come up with a non-religious reason why homosexuality is wrong?"

Sure, let me ask you one question first...

Do you think that homosexuality is not just a choice, but something natural someone can be born with...thus normal?

Wow non religious reason lemme see AIDS might be one. Wow any others STDS your can't reproduce that way... What else is there

« Last edited by g33k on Sep 5th 2008 »

On 05-Sep-2008 Youkou said:

"So, anyway, can anyone actually come up with a non-religious reason why homosexuality is wrong?"

Sure, let me ask you one question first...

Do you think that homosexuality is not just a choice, but something natural someone can be born with...thus normal?

You ask a difficult question. It isn't known for certain whether people can be "born" gay.

I do not think that it is always down to genetics, or hormone levels in the womb, seeing as a study done on identical twins (genetically identical and exposed to the same hormones) revealed that in 52% of cases where one twin was gay, the other was, as well, which indicates that while either genetics or hormone levels (or both) have something to do with it, they are not solely responsible in 100% of cases.

Ultimately, I believe that (at least in the majority of cases), it's a mixture of genetic/pre-birth factors and environmental factors (which doesn't mean a choice, people don't choose what happens to them early in life), but I do not believe that being gay is a choice, just as being heterosexual is not a choice. However, I must confess that I don't see how it's particularly relevant to the question I asked.

i dont think it is completely a choice cause tehre are many people who wish not to be attracted to the same sex but yet they are and cant help it, they hate themselves for it and wish it to go away and there is nothing that can help. therefore its not completely a choice but there is the choice to act upon your sexual attractions and so no i don't think its a choice to be attracted to the same sex but it is on how you act upon those attractions.

Bible Recordings:

1 Corinthians 13:4-13

Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
Love never fails....And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.

men and men or women and women can experience the same love as a man and women together do and according to the bible in the verse above it doesn't single out male /female relationships does it? LOVE can be between two people of the same sex or of the opposite sex it doesn't matter i don't think god is going to condemn anyone to hell if they find love wit someone of the same sex.

On 05-Sep-2008 g33k said:

Wow non religious reason lemme see AIDS might be one. Wow any others STDS your can't reproduce that way... What else is there

You know, heterosexuals get AIDS too, and other STDs. I therefore declare heterosexuality to be wrong and sinful.

Sorry, I normally try to post more than this in D&D, but there's only so much I can say to such an appalling argument.

(I'll post this again, seeing as you were incompetent and deleted it the first time. Don't do it again.)

On 05-Sep-2008 Catharsis said:

You ask a difficult question. It isn't known for certain whether people can be "born" gay.

I do not think that it is always down to genetics, or hormone levels in the womb, seeing as a study done on identical twins (genetically identical and exposed to the same hormones) revealed that in 52% of cases where one twin was gay, the other was, as well, which indicates that while either genetics or hormone levels (or both) have something to do with it, they are not solely responsible in 100% of cases.

Ultimately, I believe that (at least in the majority of cases), it's a mixture of genetic/pre-birth factors and environmental factors (which doesn't mean a choice, people don't choose what happens to them early in life), but I do not believe that being gay is a choice, just as being heterosexual is not a choice. However, I must confess that I don't see how it's particularly relevant to the question I asked.

I see, so here goes:

Since homosexuality is a sexual preference, so is bestiality, pedophilia, necrophilia...etc. and those can be used with the same point of view as with homosexuality, thus making a valid point to you and anyone who thinks that way

Get my drift?

On 05-Sep-2008 Youkou said:

I see, so here goes:

Since homosexuality is a sexual preference, so is bestiality, pedophilia, necrophilia...etc. and those can be used with the same point of view as with homosexuality, thus making a valid point to you and anyone who thinks that way

Get my drift?

You forget that heterosexuality is a sexual preference too. Double standards? Wait, nevermind, that argument's old anything.

Homosexuality (and indeed heterosexuality) = between two consenting adults and not going to hurt anyone. Paedophilia/etc. = not between two consenting adults, and quite likely to hurt someone. Get my point..?

Bestiality is not illegal...Google it, enjoy :p

Often pedophilia is also with the agreement of the under aged person...I'm sure you dreamed/fantasize before of a teacher in high school and so did/do your friends...etc? Or are ya talking about "rape" now? As in..."not willing"? Cuz that's a whole different matter :p

Necrophilia...well the "other" person is dead, so yeah XD

And also dun forget...we are supposed to reproduce and two penises make that a tad bit "hard" don't ya think? :p

On 05-Sep-2008 Chaos H8 said:

i dont think it is completely a choice cause tehre are many people who wish not to be attracted to the same sex but yet they are and cant help it, they hate themselves for it and wish it to go away and there is nothing that can help. therefore its not completely a choice but there is the choice to act upon your sexual attractions and so no i don't think its a choice to be attracted to the same sex but it is on how you act upon those attractions.

Bible Recordings:

1 Corinthians 13:4-13

Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
Love never fails....And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.

men and men or women and women can experience the same love as a man and women together do and according to the bible in the verse above it doesn't single out male /female relationships does it? LOVE can be between two people of the same sex or of the opposite sex it doesn't matter i don't think god is going to condemn anyone to hell if they find love wit someone of the same sex.

We are talking about homosexuality...not love.

They are two different matters...if you love your parents, does that involve sexuality?

On 05-Sep-2008 Youkou said:

Bestiality is not illegal...Google it, enjoy :p

Often pedophilia is also with the agreement of the under aged person...I'm sure you dreamed/fantasize before of a teacher in high school and so did/do your friends...etc? Or are ya talking about "rape" now? As in..."not willing"? Cuz that's a whole different matter :p

Necrophilia...well the "other" person is dead, so yeah XD

And also dun forget...we are supposed to reproduce and two penises make that a tad bit "hard" don't ya think? :p

...Are you arguing for or against homosexuality now? I honestly can't tell... you're justifying the very things that you just compared it to.

Oh, and I know bestiality isn't illegal everywhere (hell, some guy was forced to marry a goat in Sudan). Pedophilia/necrophilia - well, that leads into the whole age of consent debate, and the debate over what "rights" people have over their bodies post mortem... Both difficult issues. But no, for the record, I never fancied one of my teachers - my school isn't one for hiring young attractive teachers.

And reproduction... Well, the world's overpopulated anyway.

Against, you missed the point of me doing that :p

And sure, so everyone in China should be gay huh? You should run for president there