God's opposition to homosexual behavior. Why?

[BilliardsBall]

The Bible says a rabbit chews its cud, so obviously there are going to be disagreements between "true science" and the Bible.

Why does the Bible say that rabbits chew the cud? Is this an error in the Bible?

 

[Mock Turtle]

I believe you and I both know that in academia, numerous theories have been proposed to explain the development of homosexuality, but there is so far no universally accepted account of the origins of a homosexual sexual orientation.

However, I can tell you I've heard from a secular psychologist who counseled 300 gay men, 298 of them had either same sex molestation or a broken father relationship or both. That's an over 99% correlation. Since that time, every gay person I've encountered has answered in the affirmative when questioned. My eyes were opened and it changed my response to and ministry to homosexuals. Broken persons!

Have you done the same thorough(?) research for lesbians?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Why does the Bible say that rabbits chew the cud? Is this an error in the Bible?

Yes, it is an error contained in the Bible. Like when it describes a circle that would have pi being equal to 3. It totally botches the behavior of ants. It erroneously claims that the Canaanites were destroyed. It claims the moon has its own light. It also says the moon is of the night ("rule the night") yet the moon is not visible on all nights and is often visible during the day.

 

[SomeRandom]

I believe you and I both know that in academia, numerous theories have been proposed to explain the development of homosexuality, but there is so far no universally accepted account of the origins of a homosexual sexual orientation.

However, I can tell you I've heard from a secular psychologist who counseled 300 gay men, 298 of them had either same sex molestation or a broken father relationship or both. That's an over 99% correlation. Since that time, every gay person I've encountered has answered in the affirmative when questioned. My eyes were opened and it changed my response to and ministry to homosexuals. Broken persons!

Okay so all you really have to back up your very specific (and arguably slanderous) claim is anctedotal evidence and readily admit there is no real concrete unbiased academic evidence?
Why should I believe you then? What makes your claim verifiable?
You know/met a guy who told you something. So freaking what? That's not exactly impressive.

Christ, if I pulled that kind of crap on a high school research assignment even I'd be lucky not to get an F. (I'm only having fun, mate. But seriously, you might want to consider better sources for the future. Just saying.)

This is why we have an unbiased source of information (academia) to rely upon to back up our claims. Otherwise debates would be a chaotic mix of unsubstantiated claims unable to be actually verified by unbiased sources. Rendering them useless.

I mean I can just as easily claim that all Christians I know come from abusive backgrounds and according to the very low standards of evidence, which you yourself have abided by on this very debate, my claim would be true.

 

[shmogie]

The Bible says a rabbit chews its cud, so obviously there are going to be disagreements between "true science" and the Bible.

Quotation please. I think you are wrong

 

[shmogie]

Yes, it is an error contained in the Bible. Like when it describes a circle that would have pi being equal to 3. It totally botches the behavior of ants. It erroneously claims that the Canaanites were destroyed. It claims the moon has its own light. It also says the moon is of the night ("rule the night") yet the moon is not visible on all nights and is often visible during the day.

Interesting, but without specific identification of these alleged verses, your conclusions are yout opinion

 

[Prestor John]

We weren't addressing anything you said. Or are you posting under two names?

.

Don't jump to conspiracies just yet.

What she wrote looked so much like something I had said I assumed she was referring to what I had said.

 

[Katzpur]

Nothing to get over. I already told you I am not attached to whether or not you believe anything I say. Truth cuts its own path.
Also, I reject the vast majority of what passes for Mormon Fundamentalism.

Think of the FLDS as the dead body of Abel that keeps coming up from the ground because the earth refuses to receive Abel's dead body in burial. This is what the apocrypha says happens with Abel's dead body, and that is what is happening right now as the new foundation for the new world is being laid. Lucifer-Cain is currently having his moments of glory and he thinks he is going to have success in usurping the Kingdom from the Father, but the Father has some hidden surprises for Lucifer-Cain.

Don't get me wrong... Lucifer-Cain will get a dominion, and it will be over the vast majority of humanity and it will be a long-standing major world power for centuries to come, but it won't be the Father's Kingdom. It will be his own kingdom that the Father allows him to have so that all those who reject the Father's Kingdom will have a place to go. What Lucifer-Cain will come to understand and accept is that his bounds are set and limited and those who are true and faithful to the Father's Kingdom are sanctified and untouchable by Lucifer-Cain. The two world-powers will come to terms and coexist.

Could you tell me, please, what an LDS Restitutionist is?

 

[SkepticThinker]

I went into more detail elsewhere, but the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, which all of the Torah based religions adhere to in one way or another, are associated with a particular manner of governance. Yahweh is a tribal deity with a patriarchal based governmental society. It's aim is to maximize individual autonomy by laying all of the typical functions of government upon the family structure. This does away with the need for property taxes, income taxes, etc. because there isn't a centralized government that needs to generate revenue to function. Therefore, under Yahweh's system of governance, it is vitally important that the mechanisms by which families are able to function are running in tip-top shape. If the family falls into a disoriented and confused state, then the society's mode of governance also falls into a chaotic state. Homosexuality is very disruptive to this manner of governance.

I'm still wondering HOW.

Homosexuality today isn't a big deal at all because we have a large centralized government that has enslaved all of the citizenry. Family is really becoming less and less important and will continue to be less important the more government takes over every aspect of people's every day lives. Homosexuality goes hand-in-hand with "big government" where everyone is enslaved because it is now about domination. The citizenry becomes more and more dominated as they become more and more dependent upon the central government. Homosexuality is the mode of sexuality for those who favor this. They get free health care to cope with all of the noxious diseases they contract because typically people in this mode of sexuality have several partners or their partners tend to change more frequently than the more patriarchal minded society.

I thank you for answering my question.

But the stuff in this paragraph is offensive nonsense.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I believe you and I both know that in academia, numerous theories have been proposed to explain the development of homosexuality, but there is so far no universally accepted account of the origins of a homosexual sexual orientation.

However, I can tell you I've heard from a secular psychologist who counseled 300 gay men, 298 of them had either same sex molestation or a broken father relationship or both. That's an over 99% correlation. Since that time, every gay person I've encountered has answered in the affirmative when questioned. My eyes were opened and it changed my response to and ministry to homosexuals. Broken persons!

So we're right back here again. Once again, you appear to be saying that our sexual orientation is/can be set by the sex/gender of the person who has molested us. So does heterosexuality work this way or not? Are you saying this is how our sexual orientation is set? That I'm a heterosexual female because I was molested by a man when I was younger?

And again, you're also ignoring the fact that sexuality really isn't this kind of straight up binary black and white thing, as Kinsey and others managed to demonstrate for us.

Also, if this guy you speak of is a psychologist, then he has probably published some papers on the subject. Can you point us in that direction?

 

[SkepticThinker]

Quotation please. I think you are wrong

Leviticus 11:6 The rabbit, though it chews the cud, does not have a divided hoof; it is unclean for you.

 

[shmogie]

Leviticus 11:6 The rabbit, though it chews the cud, does not have a divided hoof; it is unclean for you.

I have raised and shown rabbits. They regurgitate and rechew their food, as well as feces. They are vegetarian, so only regurgitate vegetable matter. It happens on a regular basis during the day, and night. So, the Bible is correct. Today, there is a latin term for this, which I forget, the Hebrew term is correct.

 

[Skwim]

I have raised and shown rabbits. They regurgitate and rechew their food, as well as feces. They are vegetarian, so only regurgitate vegetable matter. It happens on a regular basis during the day, and night. So, the Bible is correct. Today, there is a latin term for this, which I forget, the Hebrew term is correct.

Refection is NOT the same thing as rumination.

ru·mi·na·tion
ˌro͞oməˈnāSH(ə)n/
noun
noun: rumination; plural noun: ruminations

Zoology
....the action of chewing the cud.

cud
kəd/
noun
noun: cud

1. partly digested food returned from the first stomach of ruminants to the mouth for further chewing.

re·fec·tion
rəˈfekSH(ə)n/
noun: refection

Zoology
the eating of partly digested fecal pellets, as practiced by rabbits.

.​

 

[Mock Turtle]

Refection is NOT the same thing as rumination.

ru·mi·na·tion
ˌro͞oməˈnāSH(ə)n/
noun
noun: rumination; plural noun: ruminations

Zoology
....the action of chewing the cud.
"cows slow down their rumination"

cud
kəd/
noun
noun: cud

1. partly digested food returned from the first stomach of ruminants to the mouth for further chewing.

re·fec·tion
rəˈfekSH(ə)n/
noun: refection

Zoology
the eating of partly digested fecal pellets, as practiced by rabbits.

.​

I should have chosen Ruminant as my username - perhaps already taken?

 

[Skwim]

I should have chosen Ruminant as my username - perhaps already taken?

Go for it. I, for one, won't be using it.

.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Go for it. I, for one, won't be using it.

.

Not me now, but it would have applied for much of my life.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Quotation please. I think you are wrong

Leviticus 11 3-6 and Deuteronomy 4 7

I would not call chewing on your own poop "chewing one's cud".

 

[Subduction Zone]

Have you done the same thorough(?) research for lesbians?

My research into lesbians has been pretty much limited to Pornhub and related sites. Are those valid resources?

 

[Mock Turtle]

My research into lesbians has been pretty much limited to Pornhub and related sites. Are those valid resources?

I don't know - I rarely am thinking when I visit such sites - and fortunately it is becoming rarer these days. I suspect BB will find much inspiration there though.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Have you done the same thorough(?) research for lesbians?

I'm not a clinical, secular psychologist specialist. The one I heard from worked with gay men.

However, in my friendships and acquaintances and witnessing, yes, lesbians were in the same situation--plus, it's an oft-easy measured sliding scale. Meet a lesbian who has never had opposite sex desire or tried to be bisexual or experiment, and...