That Whole Homosexual--Sin Thing

[Subduction Zone]

Meh, it's essentially a more complex version of the unstoppable force vs. Unmovable object paradox. There are ways around it.

Since unstoppable forces and unmovable objects do not and cannot exist in our universe there really is no paradox. Perhaps the same could be applied to God, there is no omniscient nor omnipotent God in our universe. I guess that there is a way around it.

 

[QuestioningMind]

In a post in another thread it was mentioned that god considers gay sex a sin. Nothing new. Everyone knows it, but it got me wondering why. What is so wrong about an act, which only brings pleasure and hurts no one, that god considers it a sin? So much so, in fact, that if one engages in homosexual sex god will bar such an unrepentant or ignorant sinner from Heaven.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (ESV)
9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous[a] will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, 10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
​

While, as I understand it, it's no sin to have a homosexual attachment to someone, as long as it isn't lustful I guess, it does imply that once pee pees touch or hoo-has meet it's all over. Think of it. Let the sexual organs of two homosexuals get as close as possible while still leaving breathing space between them and you're home free. BUT let the two touch for just a fraction of a second and god will have picked up on it and punched your ticket to hell.

I know the Bible doesn't explain why god detests homosexual sex in particular---although "denial" does come to mind---but shouldn't there be an obvious reason for it? Or does it all come down to invoking the old "God Works In Mysterious Ways" rationalization?


In any case, let's hear it people! The Reason God Detests Homosexual Sex Is BECAUSE:____________________________________________ .
(And "because It's icky" is not an acceptable answer.)

.

Because the people who made up God had something against homosexuals for some reason and decided that their God should have something against them as well.

 

[Skwim]

Their right to peacefully assemble isn’t what I have an issue with. My issue is clothing choice, presence of minors, and a strange need to be proud of something they claim isn’t a choice. Then, I also have an issue with “***** hats” so...

So your beef with homosexuals isn't only that they have sex with each other, but that they don't dress the way you'd like them to. That, like heterosexuals, they're sometimes around children, and that you don't like the fact that they're proud of who they are. fair enough. Your entitled to your weird prejudices as much as the next Christian.

What’s difficult to understand?

It's not worth going into.

I don’t see how it’s lying to answer a question with memorized data when that’s what’s required of me. Do I assert the memorized data to be fact? I don’t. However, the test isn’t asking me my personal view on whether humans are animals, it’s necessitating I respond with what I was educated to memorize on the topic.

You're right. My error.

Was this comment necessary?

Necessary? No. However, I felt it might bring recreational sex into perspective for you.

The typical mainstream education, ending at graduating high school.

Good for you.

.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Since unstoppable forces and unmovable objects do not and cannot exist in our universe there really is no paradox. Perhaps the same could be applied to God, there is no omniscient nor omnipotent God in our universe. I guess that there is a way around it.

God created a universe in which those concepts can't exist. As he is omnipotent, he could have made a universe in which they weren't paradoxical.

 

[Sky Rivers]

You seem to be the one that advocated for involving a wife and children in an earlier posts. Why not man and man equally yoked or woman and woman equally yoked? You do not need to marry a woman if that is what is bothering you.

And remember, homosexuality is not a "temptation". It is an orientation. It appears that you are claiming that your God is an evil being.

Due to your horrible debate skills and comprehension, I’m done communicating with you in this thread.

 

[InChrist]

We humans are the worst species on the planet. We kill, poison, pollute and destroy everything. We've made millions of species go extinct. What does your god say about thst, Are we still great?

Not sure why you ask are we still great? I don't assume humans are great. If you have read the biblical scriptures you would know what God says about those who destroy the earth.

 

[InChrist]

But... it isn't harmful...

You're trying to smuggle that in there as a fact but it just isn't. And don't bother with the AIDs argument. Just because its higher in one community doesnt mean that its some sort of judgement. It's also a danger in straight couples, along with syphillis and gonorrhea. Also, lesbians dont get aids, therefore the statement that homosexuals are more likely to get aids is just incorrect.

I wasn't trying to smuggle anything in and I said nothing about judgement. Neither did I say homosexuality was anymore harmful than other sexual behavior outside of God's design. I just said I think it is harmful and I do because homosexuality or any other sexual activity outside of God's design for humans will not bring ultimate satisfaction, health, and well-being, but detrimental consequences in one way or another.

 

[tigrers2019]

The only time the scriptures mention sex as being a sin not only in pagan worship, but when it also occurs between a married person with someone not their spouse.

In the Old Testament this is verified by the ancient Hebrew word TOWEBAH (religious abomination).

In the New Testament there are 2 words deliberately mistranslated found in 1Cor.6:9 and 1Tim.1:10.

 

[Deeje]

The only time the scriptures mention sex as being a sin not only in pagan worship, but when it also occurs between a married person with someone not their spouse.

The word for sexual immorality is "porneia" from which we derive the word pornography....and it means ....

1. "illicit sexual intercourse
   1. adultery, fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism, intercourse with animals etc.
      
      
   2. sexual intercourse with close relatives; Lev. 18
      
      
   3. sexual intercourse with a divorced man or woman; Mk. 10:11,12"

So not just adultery but fornication and any illicit sexual act that is contrary to the laws of God. (Acts of the Apostles 15:29; Galatians 5:19) It would therefore include viewing pornography.

In the Old Testament this is verified by the ancient Hebrew word TOWEBAH (religious abomination).

Another word used in connection with unnatural sex is "tebel" which means

1. confusion (violation of nature or divine order)
   1. perversion (in sexual sin)

In the New Testament there are 2 words deliberately mistranslated found in 1Cor.6:9 and 1Tim.1:10.

Both verses use the Greek word "arsenokoitēs" which according to Strongs means....
"one who lies with a male as with a female, sodomite, homosexual"

So what is deliberately mistranslated? What is a sodomite?

 

[Dan Mellis]

I'm not a Calvinist, sorry.

God's omniscience and omnipotence while allowing free will has been long debated, and I'm not going to try to sumarise 2000 years of theological thought here, other than to say I accept that free will is a thing.

FWIW, I don't believe God "punishes" us for sin, I believe sin inherently harms us, which is why God doesn't want us to do it.

On the other hand, I am familiar with the deterministic arguments that free will is an illusion, that all human action is deterministic, that we are just ghosts in the machine, the Chinese Room paradox, and all that. Those are some pretty compelling arguments, IF we posit a purely deterministic universe, sure. However, for our purposes here, we're assuming the existence of God, and therefore allowing for faith based positions. If you want to claim there is no God, that's a valid position, however it rather renders the whole discussion about why God doesn't approve of homosexual activity moot. If God doesn't exist, then He doesn't approve or disapprove of anything.

If god doesnt punish you for sin, do you not believe in hell? If sin is harmful, why did god make it, and make us 'want' to do it?

I don't make the claim that there is no god, just that I don't believe there is. I'm not gnostic about the position. I think the best way to charavterise my non belief is that I also can't prove that this isn't all a fever dream that I'm about to wake up from... its not likely but I cant rule it out 100%. However, even if I was, the conversation is still a valid one as it concerns the advancement of equal rights - the best way I can see to assail the belief that homosexuality shouldnt be condoned is to attack the flawed logic that it is based upon. God belief is a central part of that logic.

However, since god is a human invention, so is homophobia. Therefore, the removal of god as an excuse simply exposes the issue at hand which is people don't like people who/what they perceive to be different.

 

[Dan Mellis]

The word for sexual immorality is "porneia" from which we derive the word pornography....and it means ....

1. "illicit sexual intercourse
   1. adultery, fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism, intercourse with animals etc.
      
      
   2. sexual intercourse with close relatives; Lev. 18
      
      
   3. sexual intercourse with a divorced man or woman; Mk. 10:11,12"

So not just adultery but fornication and any illicit sexual act that is contrary to the laws of God. (Acts of the Apostles 15:29; Galatians 5:19) It would therefore include viewing pornography.




Another word used in connection with unnatural sex is "tebel" which means

1. confusion (violation of nature or divine order)
   1. perversion (in sexual sin)

Both verses use the Greek word "arsenokoitēs" which according to Strongs means....
"one who lies with a male as with a female, sodomite, homosexual"

So what is deliberately mistranslated? What is a sodomite?

I dont believe anything has been deliberately mistranslated. I just believe the book is immoral and breeds sexually repressed, imbalanced, violent, bigoted fundamentalists.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

If god doesnt punish you for sin, do you not believe in hell? If sin is harmful, why did god make it, and make us 'want' to do it?

I don't know. Why do dogs want to eat chocolate? Some things that are bad for us feel good, but that doesn't make it so. We can investigate the whys and wherefores all day, but 8t is a sad fact that sometimes things that feel good and right are inherently bad for us. If the dog with chocolate analogy doesn't grab you, consider junk food generally, or any drug of addiction.

I don't make the claim that there is no god, just that I don't believe there is. I'm not gnostic about the position. I think the best way to charavterise my non belief is that I also can't prove that this isn't all a fever dream that I'm about to wake up from... its not likely but I cant rule it out 100%. However, even if I was, the conversation is still a valid one as it concerns the advancement of equal rights - the best way I can see to assail the belief that homosexuality shouldnt be condoned is to attack the flawed logic that it is based upon. God belief is a central part of that logic.

However, since god is a human invention, so is homophobia. Therefore, the removal of god as an excuse simply exposes the issue at hand which is people don't like people who/what they perceive to be different.

If you don't believe in God, asking why God opposes homosexual activity is rather pointless, no? I fully admit my argument is predicated on a belief in God. If you don't believe in Him, really, that's fine by me, but let's not waste each other's time trying to explain positions built on axioms the other refuses to accept.

 

[Dan Mellis]

I wasn't trying to smuggle anything in and I said nothing about judgement. Neither did I say homosexuality was anymore harmful than other sexual behavior outside of God's design. I just said I think it is harmful and I do because homosexuality or any other sexual activity outside of God's design for humans will not bring ultimate satisfaction, health, and well-being, but detrimental consequences in one way or another.

But it isnt harmful. Neither is pre or extramarital sex, necessarily.

What detrimental consequences? If a loving gay couple raise a child, that child comes out every bit as healthy as one with straight parents. The reason I brought up judgement is that aids is the only semivalid argument against homosexuality, by which I mean its the only real risk it poses to the people engaging in it.

One of my best friends is bisexual and lives with his bi girlfriend, who is more than happy for him to meet men if he wants to and she meets women. Theyre getting married soon, and are happy and healthy, as well as honest with eachother.

The trust that it requires to have that arrangement means that there is a security in their relationship which I think most people would envy.

 

[Dan Mellis]

I don't know. Why do dogs want to eat chocolate? Some things that are bad for us feel good, but that doesn't make it so.

I don't make the claim that there is no god, just that I don't believe there is. I'm not gnostic about the position. I think the best way to charavterise my non belief is that I also can't prove that this isn't all a fever dream that I'm about to wake up from... its not likely but I cant rule it out 100%. However, even if I was, the conversation is still a valid one as it concerns the advancement of equal rights - the best way I can see to assail the belief that homosexuality shouldnt be condoned is to attack the flawed logic that it is based upon. God belief is a central part of that logic.

However, since god is a human invention, so is homophobia. Therefore, the removal of god as an excuse simply exposes the issue at hand which is people don't like people who/what they perceive to be different.[/QUOTE]
If you don't believe in God, asking why God opposes homosexual activity is rather pointless, no? I fully admit my argument is predicated on a belief in God. If you don't believe in Him, really, that's fine by me, but let's not waste each other's time trying to explain positions built on axioms the other refuses to accept.[/QUOTE]

No, I wont agree to disagree because your beliefs and prejudices are actively harmful in exactly the same way that a racists beliefs are. Its a moral obligation to oppose this sort of cognitive diarrhoea when it begins to infringe on the rights of others.

Fair enough if it was a privately held belief, but the fact that people are online arguing for it means that it is not. It gets worse when we have political parties, in the UK and US, who want to legislate these beliefs at a governmental level.

Especially in the UK, there is an apathy about religion. Most people arent religious so don't care. This gives fundamentalists room to manoeuvre, which needs to stop.

 

[Dan Mellis]

I don't know. Why do dogs want to eat chocolate? Some things that are bad for us feel good, but that doesn't make it so. We can investigate the whys and wherefores all day, but 8t is a sad fact that sometimes things that feel good and right are inherently bad for us. If the dog with chocolate analogy doesn't grab you, consider junk food generally, or any drug of addiction.
If you don't believe in God, asking why God opposes homosexual activity is rather pointless, no? I fully admit my argument is predicated on a belief in God. If you don't believe in Him, really, that's fine by me, but let's not waste each other's time trying to explain positions built on axioms the other refuses to accept.

Also, the chocolate tastes good to the dog, who doesnt understand the consequences of eating it. Same with other addictions, although we do understand the consequences, the pleasure sometimes outwieghs them.

Please help me understand the consequences of being gay. Unlike you, I'm unwilling to accept "its just bad, ok." Especially when there is literally, and i mean that word in a literal sense, no valid and objective supporting evidence to the bible's veracity. Nothing. Or at least, nothing that isn't also an argument for any other religion if you just change the names.

 

[Shadow Link]

The continuation of humans, in a world with 7+ billion of them, is a bigger moral disaster than homosex.

Thought that the subject was in context about the continuation of family. But anyway, you've proved your logic as an unjustifiable rationalization.

Because I know that you're wrong about this game that are important to me.

Nonsense!

 

[RESOLUTION]

In a post in another thread it was mentioned that god considers gay sex a sin. Nothing new. Everyone knows it, but it got me wondering why. What is so wrong about an act, which only brings pleasure and hurts no one, that god considers it a sin? So much so, in fact, that if one engages in homosexual sex god will bar such an unrepentant or ignorant sinner from Heaven.

Do you think rape is a sin/wrong? Do you believe adultery is a sin/wrong? Did you note the fact you acknowledge your own understanding of unrepentant or ignorant sinner?
So you acknowledge a repentant sinner will be forgiven? An ignorant sinner? Is there such a thing in this day and age?

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (ESV)
9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous[a] will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, 10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.​

9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

Theives, drunkards,and revilers and even extortioners so what do you believe this is really revealing and whom is this being told to?

Paul is speaking to believers and warning them what they should not be doing. It is all unrighteous and all these things mean you will not possess the Kingdom of Heaven.
But there is much more than this if you want to read the bible and find out what you can.


​

While, as I understand it, it's no sin to have a homosexual attachment to someone, as long as it isn't lustful I guess, it does imply that once pee pees touch or hoo-has meet it's all over. Think of it. Let the sexual organs of two homosexuals get as close as possible while still leaving breathing space between them and you're home free. BUT let the two touch for just a fraction of a second and god will have picked up on it and punched your ticket to hell.

I know the Bible doesn't explain why god detests homosexual sex in particular---although "denial" does come to mind---but shouldn't there be an obvious reason for it? Or does it all come down to invoking the old "God Works In Mysterious Ways" rationalization?


In any case, let's hear it people! The Reason God Detests Homosexual Sex Is BECAUSE:____________________________________________ .
(And "because It's icky" is not an acceptable answer.)

.

God hates sin full stop. Homosexuals, drunkards and even idolaters and adulterers all get the same. You see there is no stages of sin from bad to not so bad.
It isn't just one sin but all sin God hates. Do you think a thief any less a sinner or more a sinner than any of the others mentioned?
what about the effeminate?


effeminate
/ɪˈfɛmɪnət/
adjective
DEROGATORY

1. (of a man) having characteristics regarded as typical of a woman; unmanly. The fact is that no sin affects the body like sexual sin and Christians bodies are the temple of Gods Spirit.

When it comes to understanding you single one sin out as if separate from the rest. Sin is sin in Gods eyes. God hates sin full stop. It's nature is irrelevant and adultery and thieving had the same outcome even being effeminate.

Why should none believers be worried about God or what he considers to be sin? It isn't God who makes reference to a sin as if individual from the rest. It is man both unbeliever and sadly in some cases believers. God will judge one day, it isn't ours to do now only believers among themselves. Paul wrote to believers not unbelievers.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Do you think rape is a sin/wrong? Do you believe adultery is a sin/wrong? Did you note the fact you acknowledge your own understanding of unrepentant or ignorant sinner?
So you acknowledge a repentant sinner will be forgiven? An ignorant sinner? Is there such a thing in this day and age?

9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

Theives, drunkards,and revilers and even extortioners so what do you believe this is really revealing and whom is this being told to?

Paul is speaking to believers and warning them what they should not be doing. It is all unrighteous and all these things mean you will not possess the Kingdom of Heaven.
But there is much more than this if you want to read the bible and find out what you can.


​

God hates sin full stop. Homosexuals, drunkards and even idolaters and adulterers all get the same. You see there is no stages of sin from bad to not so bad.
It isn't just one sin but all sin God hates. Do you think a thief any less a sinner or more a sinner than any of the others mentioned?
what about the effeminate?


effeminate
/ɪˈfɛmɪnət/
adjective
DEROGATORY

1. (of a man) having characteristics regarded as typical of a woman; unmanly. The fact is that no sin affects the body like sexual sin and Christians bodies are the temple of Gods Spirit.

When it comes to understanding you single one sin out as if separate from the rest. Sin is sin in Gods eyes. God hates sin full stop. It's nature is irrelevant and adultery and thieving had the same outcome even being effeminate.

Why should none believers be worried about God or what he considers to be sin? It isn't God who makes reference to a sin as if individual from the rest. It is man both unbeliever and sadly in some cases believers. God will judge one day, it isn't ours to do now only believers among themselves. Paul wrote to believers not unbelievers.

You need to show how and why homosexuality is wrong. "God does not like it" is not good enough.

 

[MJFlores]

"It is widely believed that HIV originated in Kinshasa, in the Democratic Republic of Congo around 1920 when HIV crossed species from chimpanzees to humans.

They have faith about that.
I have read about it but I wondered.
Maybe this disease existed way before that.
You know how homosexual sex is.
The P is inserted to A
A is a very very dirty part
It is where the ____ happens.
And when that happens
Both A and P becomes a living laboratory

Both became a walking petridish.
Most likely Alexander the Great had it
And the pervert men of Rome got it too.

 

[MJFlores]

No, unprotected sex spreads HIV, not homosexuality.

A couple of points: 1. If two non infected homosexual people have a fully monogamous relationship, they won't catch HIV, so HIV isn't an argument against them.

2. HIV transmission is virtually unknown between homosexual women, so if HIV transmission rates are your argument, heterosexuals are more "sinful" than homosexual women.

3. If you ARE basing your argument on HIV transmission rates, why doesn't the same logic apply to any of the other population specific diseases? For example, Sickle Cell Anemia is predominantly a disease among sub Saharan Africans, does SCA mean it's wrong to be black? How about Leiden V disorder? Unknown outside of Northern European descended people, does Leiden V make being European sinful?

the A is a very very dirty place

If a man inserts his P to the A
such as in a homosexual sex
He is bound to hit something.....