Leviticus and Homosexuality

[serp777]

Right, so there are homosexuals in the animal Kingdom are there. Animals are having long term relationships with other animals of the same sex. Nothing to do with their lack of intelligence or poor eyesight. I guess if the animals have told this new found fact you should be able to find a article that shows long term relationships in animals. Did you know that lions will eat their own young. Does that mean that we should act like animals here as well and eat our babies? You have been brainwashed by anti-theists

First of all, your grammar is abysmal. You should really work on it. Parsing through this was already unpleasant enough.

" I guess if the animals have told this new found fact you should be able to find a article that shows long term relationships in animals. "

If animals told this new found fact? Are you high? But yes I can show you ample evidence; for example, in our closest cousin the Chimpanzee

Homosexual behavior in primates: A review of evidence and theory - Springer

"Did you know that lions will eat their own young. Does that mean that we should act like animals here as well and eat our babies?"

Wow this is a terrible argument. Did you know lions also eat food? Does that mean we shouldn't eat so we can avoid acting like animals? Humans are animals in case you forgot about evolution. The point about homosexuality in the animal kingdom was to show that homosexuality is completely natural across the board, and so therefore there's no reason to assume homosexuality is bad or wrong.

"You have been brainwashed by anti-theists"
You're a Christian. You're an anti theist for every religion except Christianity, the religion you probably grew up with as a child, or the one your friends and family follow. We disagree with just one, and you think i'm brainwashed? You are a serious crackpot.

 

[sojourner]

Yes it is wrong but I know of no other term that is not hard on the ears. The Bible condemns sexual perversions.

Riiiight, but we now know that homosexual acts that result from committed relationships aren't perversions.

 

[allright]

So God who condemns any heterosexual acts outside of marriage as sin

is just fine with males committing unnatural sex acts with other males

What drivel

 

[Sonofason]

I had stated:

I am quite confident in the texts that I read. Those who translate the texts are doing their best to convey the truth with regard to the original texts. Those who have transcribed the original texts were doing their best to copy what was written. And I trust God to give me understanding. And God gives me understanding. Or I'm delusional, which is certainly a possibility.

sojourner writes:

Getting back on topic:
You assert that you don't know your position is correct, or why you believe that homosexuality is sinful:

Actually, I never made such an assertion.

sojourner follows up this false accusation with a quote from Sonofason that is taken out of context.

Sonofason's quote taken out of context:

I am not prepared to give an answer here as I am not very certain that my position is correct. I am inclined to believe what I believe. I don't know the source of this inclination. Perhaps it comes from observing nature, I don't know.

Let's review the thread, and see who and what Sonofason was addressing:
Original question by saint_frankenstein in post 461 when he asks:

So oral sex, hand jobs, fingering, rubbing genitals, etc. is a sin?

Sonofason responded:

Yes, I would say all of these are perversions of God's intentions for sex.

And then CynthiaCypher interjects, post 467:

So you are against kissing or having a your penis stroked or stroking the vagina of a woman and stuff like that? Any sexuality that does not involve the penis entering the vagina is sin to you?

Sonofason responded:

Well, I believe such things are a perversion of God's intentions. If you'd like to call it sin, I'm okay with that.

At this point sojourner interrupts the conversation with the following comment:

Where do you come by that belief? Can you point to a credible source for such a belief?

Try to remember, cynthia and I were talking about kissing and other more obvious perversions of God's intentions.

Nevertheless, not knowing that sojourner was oblivious with regard to the conversation at hand, Sonofason responds:

I am not prepared to give an answer here as I am not very certain that my position is correct. I am inclined to believe what I believe. I don't know the source of this inclination. Perhaps it comes from observing nature, I don't know.

On account that you cannot follow a conversation, on account that you bare false witness, I have nothing more to say to you on this subject.

 

[Sonofason]

So God who condemns any heterosexual acts outside of marriage as sin

is just fine with males committing unnatural sex acts with other males

What drivel

I believe they think there is a loophole in the Word of God which might work to their advantage. If they can marry one another, then it's okay for them to have sex with one another, even though it is an abomination to God.

 

[Sonofason]

First of all, your grammar is abysmal. You should really work on it. Parsing through this was already unpleasant enough.

" I guess if the animals have told this new found fact you should be able to find a article that shows long term relationships in animals. "

If animals told this new found fact? Are you high? But yes I can show you ample evidence; for example, in our closest cousin the Chimpanzee

Homosexual behavior in primates: A review of evidence and theory - Springer

"Did you know that lions will eat their own young. Does that mean that we should act like animals here as well and eat our babies?"

Wow this is a terrible argument. Did you know lions also eat food? Does that mean we shouldn't eat so we can avoid acting like animals? Humans are animals in case you forgot about evolution. The point about homosexuality in the animal kingdom was to show that homosexuality is completely natural across the board, and so therefore there's no reason to assume homosexuality is bad or wrong.

"You have been brainwashed by anti-theists"
You're a Christian. You're an anti theist for every religion except Christianity, the religion you probably grew up with as a child, or the one your friends and family follow. We disagree with just one, and you think i'm brainwashed? You are a serious crackpot.

Sin comes quite naturally to human beings. We don't need to behave like animals in order to be sinful. We're quite sinful enough all on our own, and it comes quite naturally to us. But behaving naturally doesn't make us good.

 

[Serenity7855]

Besides humans? Yup. (See quoted material below.)

Besides humans? Yup. (See quoted material below.)

It is 8% and not 10%, which makes a difference considering that there are a billion of them world wide. Secondly, they do not fall into the category that I clearly stated, that is, they do not have long term partners.

None that's known. But are you suggesting that only poor-sighted and unintelligent humans are homosexuals?

I would not be that vacuous to compare humans with animals in the first place.

Care to rephrase this into an intelligible statement?

I would but I fear you might not understand it if I did.

No I didn't. While filial cannibalism, which is what you're talking about, does occur in some animal species, I believe infanticide is as far as lions take it. But, in as much as you know that lions practice filial cannibalism how about sharing your source of information? Doubting Thomases would like to know.

My source is my brain. I do not need to search, cut and paste like you have done here. I just know it.

Just as you haven't been brainwashed by your religious needs.

Considering I do not belong to any particular faith, no, I have not been brainwashed.

 

[Serenity7855]

First of all, your grammar is abysmal. You should really work on it. Parsing through this was already unpleasant enough.

My grammar is not up for discussion.

" I guess if the animals have told this new found fact you should be able to find a article that shows long term relationships in animals. "

If animals told this new found fact? Are you high? But yes I can show you ample evidence; for example, in our closest cousin the Chimpanzee

Homosexual behavior in primates: A review of evidence and theory - Springer

As I thought, sporadic behaviour. No long term relationship. They do not even think about what sex they are.

"Did you know that lions will eat their own young. Does that mean that we should act like animals here as well and eat our babies?"

Wow this is a terrible argument. Did you know lions also eat food? Does that mean we shouldn't eat so we can avoid acting like animals?

You are saying that because animals are gay then we can be gay as well. I am saying that because animals eat their young then by your logic we can it are young as well.

Why can you not see that. I expect you to see the connection, English teacher and all. You should have said, according to your logic, not mine, "Did you know lions also eat food? Does that mean we should eat food as well - yes, it does. You cannot twist your logic onto me. I do not believe that we should act like animals.

Humans are animals in case you forgot about evolution. The point about homosexuality in the animal kingdom was to show that homosexuality is completely natural across the board, and so therefore there's no reason to assume homosexuality is bad or wrong.

What has evolution got to do with anything. If you want to class yourself as an animal well that is up to you, you are probably right, but do not speak for me, I have different beliefs. Homosexuality is not in question here, it is anal sex that is wrong. Homosexuality is fine.

"You have been brainwashed by anti-theists"
You're a Christian. You're an anti theist for every religion except Christianity, the religion you probably grew up with as a child, or the one your friends and family follow. We disagree with just one, and you think i'm brainwashed? You are a serious crackpot.

That last sentence is a personal attack on me. It has nothing to do with the debate. Attack the post not the poster. I will not report it but I would direct a moderator to act on it.

Now the above sentence is typical of my word predictor getting it wrong. It inserted direct instead of expect.

 

[Parsimony]

The moral of the story: animal behavior should not be used as a basis for what human behavior should or should not be.

 

[Serenity7855]

The moral of the story: animal behavior should not be used as a basis for what human behavior should or should not be.

Oh, I do hope that you are being serious as it is a profound post that echoes my sentiments exactly.

 

[Skwim]

It is 8% and not 10%, which makes a difference considering that there are a billion of them world wide.

You have got to be kidding. P l e a s e say this inanity is made in jest, lest you have us convinced you've gone bonkers.

Secondly, they do not fall into the category that I clearly stated, that is, they do not have long term partners.

No, you said "long term relationships." R-e-l-a-t-i-o-n-s-h-i-p-s. Sheeeesh!

I would not be that vacuous to compare humans with animals in the first place.

NO? then consider this little gem↓ that puts lie your reply above.

"Did you know that lions will eat their own young. Does that mean that we should act like animals here as well and eat our babies? "
​

Gotta say Serenity, you do make RF a fun visit. (And, yes, rhetorical comparisons are still comparisons.)

I would but I fear you might not understand it if I did.

I'll take this as a "No I can't make sense of what I said." Which, as it has become clear, is perfectly understandable.

My source is my brain. I do not need to search, cut and paste like you have done here. I just know it.

Yeah, having to have actual sources to back up wild claims has to be a bummer, and this is why most of us don't take our readers for gullible schnooks and expect them to believe unsubstantiated hogwash off the tops of our heads. All our "hogwash" is usually well sourced.

Considering I do not belong to any particular faith, no, I have not been brainwashed.

Believe it or not, not having a particular faith does not confer immunity from brainwashing. Just look . . . . . . . . . . Never mind, just have a good day and stay safe.

 

[Parsimony]

Oh, I do hope that you are being serious as it is a profound post that echoes my sentiments exactly.

Yes, I was.

 

[AlphaAlex115]

But humans are animals.. so if animals are gay then they are to some just as evil

 

[Bunyip]

Yes, I was.

Well why not? Why wouldn't animal behaviour be as the basis for what human behaviour should and should not be?


After all, we are animals.

 

[Serenity7855]

Yes, I was.

Thank you. May I say that I totally agree. Good post :yes:

 

[McNap]

People who are not homosexuals do not engage in homosexual conduct.

I did.
And I'm sure that I'm still heterosexual.
Just because I tried, doesn't turn me bisexual yet.
Therefore I hold on to the idea that Leviticus is directed against depraved heterosexuals who turned homosexuality into a choice by simply believing it. They're twisted. And the worst part is that decent homosexuals are put under the same umbrella with such corrupt heterosexuals.
Not that every homosexual is decent, but I sure know many decent homosexuals.

Those who make abuse of God's word were the only ones to be stoned. (One can only join Israel if he's interested in their God).
They didn't stone anyone who doesn't believe in the bible. Or maybe they did, which is why God considered them disobedient in order to seek further for obedient people.

 

[dgirl1986]

The moral of the story: animal behavior should not be used as a basis for what human behavior should or should not be.

They have learnt a lot about human behaviour from testing on animals back when it was legal to perform inhumane studies.

 

[dgirl1986]

I did.
And I'm sure that I'm still heterosexual.
Just because I tried, doesn't turn me bisexual yet.
Therefore I hold on to the idea that Leviticus is directed against depraved heterosexuals who turned homosexuality into a choice by simply believing it. They're twisted. And the worst part is that decent homosexuals are put under the same umbrella with such corrupt heterosexuals.
Not that every homosexual is decent, but I sure know many decent homosexuals.

Those who make abuse of God's word were the only ones to be stoned. (One can only join Israel if he's interested in their God).
They didn't stone anyone who doesn't believe in the bible. Or maybe they did, which is why God considered them disobedient in order to seek further for obedient people.

I dont think that sexuality should be the basis for judging a persons character, but a lot of people still do.

 

[sojourner]

So God who condemns any heterosexual acts outside of marriage as sin

is just fine with males committing unnatural sex acts with other males

What drivel

What drivel.
They aren't "unnatural" any more than heterosexual acts are "unnatural."

 

[McNap]

I dont think that sexuality should be the basis for judging a persons character, but a lot of people still do.

Yes, I know. They do.

But it's heresy that should be judged by the faithful and to be a heretic you have to be faithful in the first place.

And even for heretics we pray, since Paul taught us that heretics sometimes repent of which he himself has been put to an example.
Most homosexuals don't even get close to what we define as heresy.