On Homosexuality & Religion [Merged]

Started by Regret274 pages

Originally posted by debbiejo
Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.Matthew 5:27&28

Can also mean a man also....

This, imo, does lead to the level of intent/desire present. If one wishes to marry a woman, is he guilty? I would say not unless he is married. Is it a sin to appreciate beauty? I would say not unless it leads to a desire to possess the object of beauty. Lust is a rather broad term that could have varied or limited implications.

Originally posted by debbiejo
Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. Matthew 5:21&22

Thinking angry thoughts.

While this does condemn thoughts, it is condemning a particular type of thought. Anger is defined as a strong feeling of displeasure or hostility. Given the prior reference to lust, I would assume it is referring to hostility, which would be desire to harm another in some manner. One should not have a desire to harm another.

Also, this reference does not state that the thought is the same as murder, as the reference to lust does equate lust with adultery. What the judgement is is not referenced directly. I would assume that, given the two references, you are in danger of being judged for either the act or the similar thoughts, although they are not necessarily judged as being of the same degree.

Originally posted by debbiejo
He said to them: "It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority. But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth."
After he said this, he was taken up before their very eyes, and a cloud hid him from their sight.
They were looking intently up into the sky as he was going, when suddenly two men dressed in white stood beside them. "Men of Galilee," they said, "why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven." (Acts 1:7-11, NIV)

Rapture lust??.......

I do believe that such is an error on the part of the man lusting over the rapture. John the Beloved was titled such because he desired to tarry with men and had their welfare above his desire for his personal paradise. Given this, is it better to not lust after Heaven? I would state that love of your fellow man should be above any desire to get to Heaven.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
1) How do you know its wrong?

2) You don't wondor if it may be a necessary component to nature, as it helps limit the population very well ?

3) Homosexuals will not die off, because there always have been homosexuals, and since homosexuals are born from heterosexual couples, they will most likely always exist. Sorry...

4) You're an idiot....lemme guess, ur 16 right ?


1) Perhaps for the same reason you think she's wrong. You both can't prove your opinions but yet you both strongly believe that homosexuality is a genetic trait or sinful.
I sense the sheep argument coming... it's coming.
Just a reminder of Dr. Roselli's own words. "We are not trying to explain human sexuality by this study, whether this is a big component of what contributes in humans, it's still debatable."

2) Do you honestly believe if there were no homosexuals the world would be doomed with overpopulation? Somehow seems unlikely to me. I'm not denying homosexuality can be a sort of natural population-control though.

3) What do you base that argument on? The 2000 year old records of homosexuals in the Roman Empire? While it's generally known that homosexuality was present in many old cultures it's silly to claim that there have always been homosexuals.

4) It seems so hypocritical when you use age as an insult. If being young was a sign of idiocy and being old a sign of wisdom or intelligence, I would not be typing this.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Funny you should mention that actually, a few hundred years ago, people did think it was unnatural (and evil) to be left handed. Left handed people back then were caned to write with their right hand. Funny how fundamentalists seem to forget their own mistakes.

you are what 14 tops? So your views come from where?

Originally posted by Bardock42
And there are not that many gay people around, but it is a steady number. So they are just like nature intended them, they are not unnatural or sinful, they do what they do for the same reasons you do what you do.

If God had not wanted homosexuals...why did he make them? He could have just made no one aturally long for a partner of the same sex. Why did he do it? Is he a sadist? Or just really, really dumb?

God did not make "homosexuals" He made men and women. Don't put words in God's mouth,

Originally posted by debbiejo
According to the church and the Bible it IS a sin to think it.

One of the things that Jesus said that I didn't like was Thinking it in your heart is same as doing it

True.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
God did not make "homosexuals" He made men and women. Don't put words in God's mouth,

What did he put in god's mouth. Homosexuals are men and women.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
God did not make "homosexuals" He made men and women. Don't put words in God's mouth,

What did he put in god's mouth. Homosexuals are men and women.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
God did not make "homosexuals" He made men and women. Don't put words in God's mouth,

So god didn't make everything?

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
So god didn't make everything?

HE did

That seems to be an emphasis there.

Soleran said HE?

Everyone knows gods a woman........diva

Originally posted by Soleran
[b]HE did [/B]

But JIA said that god did not make Homosexuals. Are you saying that JIA is wrong. 😱

😆

😐

Wow. I see my link was completely ignored.

Anyway, from JIA's viewpoint, God made man and woman, but it was the corruption of the body and mind from sin that caused them to be homosexual.

Originally posted by FeceMan
Wow. I see my link was completely ignored.

Anyway, from JIA's viewpoint, God made man and woman, but it was the corruption of the body and mind from sin that caused them to be homosexual.

Could you go into more detail on that please............OH, I suppose I should wait for JIA to return.....he can answer it.

How can I corrupt my body or my mind to become gay?

It isn't you doing it; it is the sin into which we were all born.

Originally posted by FeceMan
Wow. I see my link was completely ignored.

Anyway, from JIA's viewpoint, God made man and woman, but it was the corruption of the body and mind from sin that caused them to be homosexual.

Then that same corruption also caused them to be heterosexual.

If there is sin, then god made it.........For all things are made by god.

Except for free will, which is an oxymoron with god.

Originally posted by Alliance
Except for free will, which is an oxymoron with god.

No shit, in the case of this thread, God gives you the choice between choosing to be Heterosexual or Homosexual, but if you don't choose the one God wants you go to hell, doesn't sound very free to me.

That's like going to Subway and the person behind the counter telling you "You can choose any sandwich you like, but they're all poisoned except the turkey on rye."