erm, in my opinion I think it is a bit of both.
they may always be born with the urge to be gay, and then it just happens.
I don't know myself because I aint gay and I confident I wont be. my sister knows a gay guy who has always acted a little bit homosexual and has all the trademarks of a gay person since he was 12 or so.
Originally posted by Discos
erm, in my opinion I think it is a bit of both.they may always be born with the urge to be gay, and then it just happens.
I don't know myself because I aint gay and I confident I wont be. my sister knows a gay guy who has always acted a little bit homosexual and has all the trademarks of a gay person since he was 12 or so.
What are those "trademarks" exactly?
Is it anything like sticking out his pinky when he holds a glass or does he say "fantastic" a lot?
Originally posted by Robtard
Your point? Leviticus doesn't say "no sodomy". The meaning we associate a word with today, do not/should not apply, in regards to the Bible.
The word came from Sodom, which was destroyed by god because it was full of sinners. The bible doesn't state what sins the population was responsible for, though its considered to sexual sins. It was never specified that it meant homosexuality. The story condemns any kind of "abnormal" sexual act. (the norm being missionary in the dark)
Originally posted by cococryspies
The word came from Sodom, which was destroyed by god because it was full of sinners. The bible doesn't state what sins the population was responsible for, though its considered to sexual sins. It was never specified that it meant homosexuality. The story condemns any kind of "abnormal" sexual act. (the norm being missionary in the dark)
Okay... still doesn't validate your point about the new meanings associated with the word "sodomy" and Homosexuality in the Bible.
Some food for thought regarding what else you said:
* It's highly debatable why God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, it all comes down to which Bible you read and how you interpret it. It can be said that the Cities sins were greed and gluttony, because they had plenty and did not share with their less fortunate neighbors.
* Where does it say that "normal sex" = "missionary in the dark." (Which is extrememly boring imo)
If you read Leviticus 18:22, especially the older/eldest translations, they all basically state 'a man shall not lie with a man, as he would with a woman'.
Originally posted by Robtard
Okay... still doesn't validate your point about the new meanings associated with the word "sodomy" and Homosexuality in the Bible.Some food for thought regarding what else you said:
* It's highly debatable why God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, it all comes down to which Bible you read and how you interpret it. It can be said that the Cities sins were greed and gluttony, because they had plenty and did not share with their less fortunate neighbors.
* Where does it say that "normal sex" = "missionary in the dark." (Which is extrememly boring imo)
If you read Leviticus 18:22, especially the older/eldest translations, they all basically state 'a man shall not lie with a man, as he would with a woman'.
It mentions, a couple of times at least, something about "the way of the sodomites" which was supposed to reference the "wrongness" of anal sex....but I think it was aimed at Man on Man. You are right about it depending on the version and interpretation.
Why does religion have to be in this dicussion, though. Religion usually taints* dicussions.
*heh heh......."taint"
Originally posted by dadudemon
It mentions, a couple of times at least, something about "the way of the sodomites" which was supposed to reference the "wrongness" of anal sex....but I think it was aimed at Man on Man. You are right about it depending on the version and interpretation.Why does religion have to be in this dicussion, though. Religion usually taints* dicussions.
*heh heh......."taint"
Because when people have something negative to say about homosexuality or make exceptions to rights concerning homosexuality, they usually hide behind their religion as the reason, instead of just saying the truth, which is "I hate ****."
Originally posted by Robtard
Okay... still doesn't validate your point about the new meanings associated with the word "sodomy" and Homosexuality in the Bible.
My point was that the story of Sodom, while not specific, has been interpreted by the majority of church authorities to be about sexual sins, which is why the word "sodomy" evolved to mean what it does. Just because the bible doesn't specifically state something doesn't mean that the church doesn't teach it.
Originally posted by cococryspies
My point was that the story of Sodom, while not specific, has been interpreted by the majority of church authorities to be about sexual sins, which is why the word "sodomy" evolved to mean what it does. Just because the bible doesn't specifically state something doesn't mean that the church doesn't teach it.
...and that goes back to my earlier point, people shouldn't use modern additions/meaning to words, when reading the Bible.
Don't you find it odd (inexcusably stupid), that the church, which is an organization based on religion/the bible, teaches thoughts not found in the bible?
Originally posted by Robtard
Don't you find it odd (inexcusably stupid), that the church, which is an organization based on religion/the bible, teaches thoughts not found in the bible?
Yes, and they also ignore thoughts found in the Bible.
Which leads back somewhat to the topic of this thread. The verses in the Bible that condemn homosexuality are very few when compared to stuff like "stone adulterers". So why do the religious care so much about gays yet ignore all the other "sinners"?