God's Attitude Toward Homosexuality

[Subduction Zone]

This is actually the very first example you have provided.

As I said previously, it would be uncharacteristic of me to leave any thread, but I do leave if I feel that the discussion is going nowhere, my opponent(s) are being unreasonable or I lose track of the thread.

Could you provide a link to this past discussion? I'd like to read it over to see if you have any reasonable claim to me "running away."

I find it hard to believe that I would leave any thread about the Bible.​

Nope, not going to bother. Of course you already have your weak excuses for running away instead of stating the obvious. To anyone with more than a middle school level of science comprehension the stories of Genesis are obviously mythical. You could always try to debate the topic again.. Wait, correction, you could always try to discuss the topic again. There is no more debate.

Yes, you often claim to have some source that supports your argument, but you always come up with a silly reason to never share it.

"I do have evidence that supports my claim, but I'm not going to share it with you because..."

"...you do not know how to debate properly."

- or -

"...because you have been rude."

It is important to note that you judged me according to your own personal standards of what a "debate" is or what is or is not "rude."

When someone has demonstrated that they can't debate properly they lose the right to make such demands. I have supported my claims countless times with sources. You only remember the times that you failed so poorly that I refused to cater to your nonsense.

Bias is bias. There is no more or less biased.[

Everyone's interpretation of the scriptures is biased. You and me.

And of course you are wrong again. A member of the KKK tends to be very biased against African-Americans, your average FOX viewer is still usually biased but much less so.

I do not believe this to be true.

That is only because you cannot honestly interpret the Bible. I can site specific examples.

No.

You have applied a lazy interpretation to 1 Corinthians 7. You never take into account other things that Paul has said, done and taught. Therefore, he read his words and take them out of context.

Paul testified of his religious zealotry as a Pharisee in the book of Acts and in Galatians, proving that he had been married at one time.

Paul encouraged marriage in both his first epistle to the Corinthians and to the Ephesians.

What he said in 1 Corinthians 7 was about a particular group of believers in Corinth concerning a question they asked which we do not know.

The English Standard Bible agrees with how Joseph Smith would have translated 1 Corinthians 7:1.

Eusebius claimed that the "yolkfellow" Paul mentioned in Philippians was a reference to his wife.

Clement of Alexandria claimed that "Peter, Paul and the rest of the apostles" were married men.

No one knows what the "present distress" Paul mentioned in 1 Corinthians 7 was exactly. Many believe it had to do with the persecution faced by early Christians.

Adam Clarke and James Burton Coffman, who both wrote two well-known Biblical commentaries, believed this to be the case.

However, concerning your false claim that Paul taught that Christians shouldn't marry...

Clarke said, "...for it never could be his wish that marriage should cease among men, and that human beings should no longer be propagated upon earth; nor could he wish that the Church of Christ should always be composed of single persons; this would have been equally absurd; but as the Church was then in straits and difficulties, it was much better for its single members not to encumber themselves with domestic embarrassments." (Bold and italics added)

1 Corinthians 7 Commentary - Adam Clarke Commentary

Coffman said, "It should be carefully observed, however, that Paul in no sense advocated celibacy, except in certain situations and circumstances, and that even in those cases it was merely "allowable," and not commanded. There is no disparagement of marriage here, Paul's writings in Ephesians 5:22,23, etc., making it abundantly clear that he held the institution of marriage in the very highest esteem. As Marsh said, "He is not writing a treatise on marriage, but answering their questions within the context of current attitudes and circumstances."" (Bold and italics added)

1 Corinthians 7 Commentary - James Burton Coffman Commentaries on the Bible

Joseph Smith believed that the "present distress" was a reference to the short time of ministry had by those called that was commanded by the Lord.

Either way, your claim that Paul believed and taught that Christians should never marry is contradicted by other teachings of the Bible, as well as other words of Paul.

You are quite mistaken. Just because I do not do mental gymnastics to defend the indefensible does not mean that my interpretation was lazy. Paul was clearly against marriage because it was to be used as a last resort according to him. It was not something that one should naturally strive for. Now he may have been married at one time, though that seems to be a stretch to put it mildly, but you cannot deny that he did recommend that people remain single like him. In those days being married was no confirmation that he was straight. In the days when gay people were executed for being gay quite a few gay men married and led a double life.

And if you wish to read an article, not from an "anti-religious" source on Paul you should check out this one:


Was the Apostle Paul Gay?

Sorry, using my table right now and copy and paste does not work as well as the desk top. So no quotes from it. But it does offer a less likely alternative explanation. His physical problem may have been epilepsy.

On the contrary, treating each verse or chapter as an independent island showcases your ignorance on this subject.

Now why would you tell such a lie? I do not take verses out of context. You know that. The interpretation I give them always matches the context. You just complained because I don't jump through ridiculous hoops. Try to be consistent.

Correct. "Other" sources. Not only those anti-religion sources you favor.

Very few of my sources are "anti-religion". Why do you use sources that lie for Jesus?

Just admit that you have an agenda.

L-O-L

Much less of an agenda than you have, and at least I try to be honest. I explained your flaw and you could not properly respond to it.

As usual, if you have a question that you need a deeper answer to then ask if properly. Long posts only get short answers. Bring it up in a separate post.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ all people can overcome their weaknesses if they sincerely repent of their sins and come to Him with full purpose of heart.

We are not able to choose which weaknesses we suffer from, but we can choose to fight against or succumb to them.

Having a same-sex attraction is a weakness. Engaging in homosexual behavior is succumbing to that weakness.

Someone who has a weakness, but does not succumb to their weakness, are not guilty of committing the sins associated with that weakness.

Hardly a weakness. It is merely a natural.variation that shows up quite often in nature. And not a "sin". You need more than a book full of myths and errors to claim that it is a sin.

 

[YmirGF]

Through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ all people can overcome their weaknesses if they sincerely repent of their sins and come to Him with full purpose of heart.

We are not able to choose which weaknesses we suffer from, but we can choose to fight against or succumb to them.

Having a same-sex attraction is a weakness. Engaging in homosexual behavior is succumbing to that weakness.

Someone who has a weakness, but does not succumb to their weakness, are not guilty of committing the sins associated with that weakness.

I'll leave you to your psychotic notions of god and wish you well.

 

[Prestor John]

I'll leave you to your psychotic notions of god and wish you well.

Ad hominem and run away?

 

[YmirGF]

Ad hominem and run away?

Trust me. You don't want me to stay. G'day.

 

[Prestor John]

Trust me. You don't want me to stay. G'day.

I suppose I don't, but not for the reason you'd think.

 

[columbus]

Nature will put things back on track. What is left standing we will deemed natural. What is damaged will be asked to wake up and smell the coffee.

Do you take this attitude towards all medical treatment? My mom's second pregnancy was ectopic. If she hadn't been diagnosed and gotten an abortion, she would have died an agonizing death. The baby as well. That's the natural outcome of ectopic pregnancy.

I don't see why people think that "natural" behavior is some kind of moral standard. Theft is natural, cooking is unnatural.
Tom

 

[Prestor John]

Do you take this attitude towards all medical treatment? My mom's second pregnancy was ectopic. If she hadn't been diagnosed and gotten an abortion, she would have died an agonizing death. The baby as well. That's the natural outcome of ectopic pregnancy.

I don't see why people think that "natural" behavior is some kind of moral standard. Theft is natural, cooking is unnatural.
Tom

The scriptures claim that the "natural man" is an enemy to God.

Therefore, what is "natural" does not equate to what is "good" or "correct".

 

[joelr]

gods attitude on homosexuals, looks like G should be taking gays out of the land?

Homosexuality is an abomination to God.

Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. Leviticus 18:22
Except that unlike eating shrimp, the punishment for homosexuality is death.

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. Lev.20:13

Or exile.

Asa did that which was right in the eyes of the LORD ... And he took away the sodomites out of the land. ... Asa's heart was perfect with the LORD all his days. 1 Kings 15:11-14

Jehoshaphat ... walked in all the ways of Asa his father; he turned not aside from it, doing that which was right in the eyes of the LORD ... The remnant of the sodomites, which remained in the days of his father Asa, he took out of the land. 1 Kings 42:42-46

And the New Testament is just as intolerant toward homosexuals.

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 recompence of their error which was meet. (God will make you gay!) Romans 1:26-27

God gave them over to a reprobate mind ... without natural affection ... they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them. Romans 1:28-32

The unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom ... neither fornicators ... nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind ... shall inherit the kingdom of God. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10

Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for ... them that defile themselves with mankind ... and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine ... These filthy dreamers defile the flesh. 1 Timothy 1:9-10

Even as Sodom and Gomorrha ... giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh ... suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. Jude 7-8


I tell you, in that night there shall be two men in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left. Two women shall be grinding together; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Luke 17:34-35

And finally, rejoice and be glad when you see homosexuals (lead about by silly, lusty, educated women), because then you'll know for sure that Jesus is coming soon.

In the last days ... men shall be ... without natural affection ... lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, ... ever learning. 2 Timothy 3:1-7

 

[IndigoChild5559]

gods attitude on homosexuals, looks like G should be taking gays out of the land?

Homosexuality is an abomination to God.

Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. Leviticus 18:22
Except that unlike eating shrimp, the punishment for homosexuality is death.

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. Lev.20:13

Or exile.

Asa did that which was right in the eyes of the LORD ... And he took away the sodomites out of the land. ... Asa's heart was perfect with the LORD all his days. 1 Kings 15:11-14

Jehoshaphat ... walked in all the ways of Asa his father; he turned not aside from it, doing that which was right in the eyes of the LORD ... The remnant of the sodomites, which remained in the days of his father Asa, he took out of the land. 1 Kings 42:42-46

And the New Testament is just as intolerant toward homosexuals.

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 recompence of their error which was meet. (God will make you gay!) Romans 1:26-27

God gave them over to a reprobate mind ... without natural affection ... they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them. Romans 1:28-32

The unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom ... neither fornicators ... nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind ... shall inherit the kingdom of God. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10

Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for ... them that defile themselves with mankind ... and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine ... These filthy dreamers defile the flesh. 1 Timothy 1:9-10

Even as Sodom and Gomorrha ... giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh ... suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. Jude 7-8


I tell you, in that night there shall be two men in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left. Two women shall be grinding together; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Luke 17:34-35

And finally, rejoice and be glad when you see homosexuals (lead about by silly, lusty, educated women), because then you'll know for sure that Jesus is coming soon.

In the last days ... men shall be ... without natural affection ... lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, ... ever learning. 2 Timothy 3:1-7

I buy this under one condition, and that's that you accept the other sins presented under the same context.

For example, the Torah also speaks of eating unclean meats as "an abomination." Can you accept that eating pork and shellfish is for the Jew an abomination unto God?

And in the New Testament, homosexuality is listed right next to lying. Do you agree that lying is just as evil as homosexuality? Do you really?

If you can answer yes to those two questions, then you are being Biblically consistant. If you can't, then you are not really going by the Bible. You are simply being a homophobe using the Bible to conveniently justify your views.

 

[pearl]

Homosexuality is an abomination to God.

The abomination was 'idolatry'.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

The abomination was 'idolatry'.

There are many things on the abomination list, and there is, if I remember right, more than one list. For example, eating pork is an abomination also.

 

[Skwim]

The abomination was 'idolatry'.

"THEE abomination"?

You make it sound as if there is only one thing god finds to be an abomination, idolatry, when we know darn well he also regards male homosexual sex to be an abomination.

Leviticus 18:22
You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.

.​

 

[Vaderecta]

This is such a silly argument. Some men like men. Some women like women. Some Women like men and women and so on and so forth.

Why are people judging people based upon what sex they like to have? Some book written thousands of years ago by people you don't know and have never met says you need to hate certain people and so then you go ahead and hate them? Who raised you? People are people. Some are republicans and some democrats and some are gay or straight. They are all our equals. Loving people is not a crime.

 

[Skwim]

Why are people judging people based upon what sex they like to have? Some book written thousands of years a go by people you don't know and have never met says you need to hate certain people and so then you go ahead and hate them? Who raised you? People are people. Some are republicans and some democrats and some are gay or straight. They are all our equals. Loving people is not a crime.

Why? Because when some people adopt a religion it's a matter of "In for a dime. In for a dollar." And no thinking required . . . . . . .and sometimes, even allowed.

.

 

[Vaderecta]

Why? Because when some people adopt a religion it's a matter of "In for a dime. In for a dollar." And no thinking required . . . . . . .and sometimes, even allowed.

.

That is a bit lazy. Are you anti-religious? This is general belief theory. When people become yankee fans they hate the red sox. It's just people place higher intrinsic value on their religious beliefs then their sports beliefs because it comes up so often. Maybe some dude was at a funeral and it was catholic and now your trying to talk them out of their catholic belief. Good luck considering they just had this powerful catholic experience with a dead relative. People are not creatures of logic. Computers might be. But people are real and have feelings and experiences and they are all not as a smart as each other. They have their own experiences and those experiences have meaning intrinsic to who they are.

Its not that they aren't thinking. Its that they share the same dna that made all people possible.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That is a bit lazy. Are you anti-religious? This is general belief theory. When people become yankee fans they hate the red sox. It's just people place higher intrinsic value on their religious beliefs then their sports beliefs because it comes up so often. Maybe some dude was at a funeral and it was catholic and now your trying to talk them out of their catholic belief. Good luck considering they just had this powerful catholic experience with a dead relative. People are not creatures of logic. Computers might be. But people are real and have feelings and experiences and they are all not as a smart as each other. They have their own experiences and those experiences have meaning intrinsic to who they are.

Its not that they aren't thinking. Its that they share the same dna that made all people possible.

I don't think any of us are "anti-religious". What we are is anti-extremists. Not all Christians, probably not even not most Christians, take the Bible literally on how gays are to be treated. I have no problem with those people. I do not like those that hate others because their holy book tells them to (though frankly I think that they are using the Bible as an excuse for their hate).

 

[Skwim]

That is a bit lazy. Are you anti-religious?

Other than a passing amusement, and at times a foe, I have no use for it.

 

[Vaderecta]

I don't think any of us are "anti-religious". What we are is anti-extremists. Not all Christians, probably not even not most Christians, take the Bible literally on how gays are to be treated. I have no problem with those people. I do not like those that hate others because their holy book tells them to (though frankly I think that they are using the Bible as an excuse for their hate).

Ok maybe you are right. But where does this hate originate from? These are people loving other people and some people finding reasons to hate them or being instructed to hate them. Books are not holy or magical. They are books.

 

[Vaderecta]

Other than a passing amusement, and at times a foe, I have no use for it.

However some people do. I have had people tell me after their wife died or meh... just bad circumstances... that if it wasn't for whatever religion they worshipped they couldn't go on. People are finding meaning in belief and in religion and we dont need to just dump on these people like their some relic or alien. I went door to door for years selling religion and then coupons but I think you take my point. People are just trying to survive. Maybe you are not faced with their challenges and if you were maybe you would find them to be more of stepping stones to how you came to be but some people slip and fall and need this. (I am a recovering atheist and now agnostic but that is beside the point) Some people need the community and the belief to just get through their day. Maybe we need better community places that are not called churches but maybe they are I don't know... But being religious is not a bad thing. (And I also dont care if you like the yankees or mets or red sox, celtics, dolphins or whatever.)