Again, we need to stay on topic. Please redirect your questions to another forum.
I concur.
Nature, Nurture, or Choice?
- Thread starter karrie
- Start date
I don't know what you're winking about, but as soon as you trot out sin and the bible, I have to wonder. Google animal homosexuality? No thanks, if I want porn, I'll look at the human stuff.
You're missing the point. BTW, how much are you getting paid (beit monetary or other) for playing the Anti-Christ or does it just turn you on?
Homosexuality is NOT a sin. No where in the 10 commandments does God forbade homosexuality. Leviticus is man made Jewish laws.
It has been said that man has been made in God's likeness, that we are all God's children.
Your reference to Adam and Eve is also overly simplistic and is slanted severely to man's improper interpretation.
It has been said that man has been made in God's likeness, that we are all God's children.
Your reference to Adam and Eve is also overly simplistic and is slanted severely to man's improper interpretation.
There are a number of direct references to homosexuality in the Bible. In Mosaic law, male homosexuality is identified as an "abomination". In the New Testament, Paul of Tarsus condemns arsenokoitēs, a term related to male homosexuality that is open to much interpretation; it could mean male homosexual acts, male prostitution, or sex with men in general (hetero- or homosexual). Paul also makes reference to female homosexuality when he refers to "unnatural relations" between women in the Epistle to the Romans.
That is because Paul had a thing for young boys and hated women. I'm sure he had a thing for goats too but the bible doesn't mention THAT.
Funny how tolerance only applies to the things we believe.
To avoid mincing words that's a load of crap, but you're right, I am at the end of my argument because to discuss this further is akin to beating one's head against a wall.
Have you read Paul's rantings? It is all in there, except for the goat part. After reading his rants I got a real bad taste in my mouth. Reminded me of something I accidentally put in my mouth when I was too young to know better.
It is on topic, because your argument seems to be based partially on the obvious contradiction of the story of the fall and the claim that sin did not precede it. To challenge that claim is to challenge your arguments in regard to homosexuality.
All references are either Leviticus, or in reference to Leviticus this includes Paul.
Lots of problems begin with a persons interpretation of the bible. We have had differing translations etc, then we have a personal bias to state this or that passage supports their opinion. Gerry is bang on - God made us in his image. That means warts and all. Like Gerry mentions go to the big 10.
Homo sexuality has been around since the beginning of time. It is completely natural. it is not abnormal, not a sin.
Some would say that man was meant to procreate and as such homosexuality is abnormal. Wrong. If and I believe so, God made us he knew that he was also creating homosexuality. Why would he create someone to suffer. It goes against Gods will and the teachings of Jesus to purposely create a person to suffer.
It was insinuated in earlier posts that sexual intercourse with a girl as soon as she menstruates is perfectly normal and acceptable. I have a bit of a problem with that, many girls today are physically women at age 11 or 12, while others are still mentally children at 16. I am a strong believer that sex with children (mentally) is wrong, it's immoral and it's unnatural. J.M.H.O..
Absolutely - the things Clifford Olson and Jeffrey Dahmer did were perfectly natural for them.
Absolutely - the things Clifford Olson and Jeffrey Dahmer did were perfectly natural for them.
Like the omniscient, omnipotent deity never saw it coming after setting it all up himself. The illogic of religiously-based arguments never ceases to amaze me. That's not a true story though, it's just a post hoc rationalization invented by a superstitious, largely illiterate, pre-scientific culture trying to come up with an explanation for the less than idyllic way things are. Taking it literally as the true explanation now given all we've learned since bespeaks a foolish credulity.
It's also the argument from authority fallacy, not a valid argument.
Good point Cord, there is no single definition for "natural", As I pointed out in a different post what is natural for Clifford Olson and Jeffrey Dahmer is not natural for you and me. I guess "natural" doesn't really fit into the argument. Cannibalism is very natural for certain tribes in New Guinea.
Was there anywhere that it was insinuated that it was acceptable?
How much are you getting paid to repeat the company line?
I'll jump out on a limb and say yes.........................Cliff's post about it being a common practice 100 years ago, but for confirmation best ask Cliff. (I think he was insinuating) :lol: