Any other childfree people here?

[Anonymous]

Originally Posted by Lazy Orang

Most of that makes no sense to me. The only thing that makes the slightest bit of sense is sex being spiritual (which maybe it is, or maybe it isn't, or maybe under certain circumstances it can be, I don't know), and emotional (which it certainly can be - not that I've had personal experience, I'm only 15). In that case, why aren't those of the same gender allowed to bond in that emotional and spiritual way? Once again, we come back to 'because God says so', and that's not good enough.

Also, as I said before, there is evidence for sexuality being inbuilt - please, please look it up.

On the homosexuality issue specifically, it also stems from the fact that God created men and women complimentarily with different strengths and weaknesses. They are both equal, they are just suited for different things and different tasks. These differences exist so that a man and a woman are designed to be together and compliment each other, helping one another throughout life, within the institution of marriage. Sex, in its proper context, is a sort of emotional and spiritual glue that binds the husband and wife even closer to one another. In addition, it also allows the husband and wife to participate in a small way in the creation of life. As a result, homosexuality involves a rejection of God's standards for sexual activity, a rejection of the way in which God created human beings as gendered, and a rejection of the way God designed and intended healthy marriage and sexual relationships to be, since they are intended to be between a man and a woman.

I guess it also comes down to the fact that I am willing to trust God's omniscience, (all-knowingness), over my fractured, limited point of view and ability to reason. I'm willing to trust his "Because I said so." and you aren't.

Regarding why Christ had to die, I've stated it as best I can. I think the communication problem is my fault, since you still seem to be confused, but I tried to articulate it as best I can and honestly can't really think of a better way to explain it that you'll understand. I'm deeply sorry about that.

[greygnarl]

As a result, homosexuality involves a rejection of God's standards for sexual activity, a rejection of the way in which God created human beings as gendered, and a rejection of the way God designed and intended healthy marriage and sexual relationships to be, since they are intended to be between a man and a woman.

If this is the case then why did he create homosexuals?

[MegaSilver]

I would like to point out that not all Christians think homosexuality is as bad as it used to be considered, especially considering there's little to no mention of it in the New Testament.

[flameslayer93]

If this is the case then why did he create homosexuals?

Some argue that homosexuality is a choice, as opposed to inborn nature. I believe Anon himself said this to be his belief at an earlier part of this thread.

[Crixus33]

Originally Posted by greygnarl

If this is the case then why did he create homosexuals?

Would you agree it would be dictatorial to not provide us with free will? If then if homosexual tendencies are genetic it is one of the ways God is allowing us to have free will. If they didn't have at least the choice to act on their homosexuality, then God would definitely be a dictator. But he gave us free choice, so if he has to give us brains (and therefore DNA) that can choose to act contrary to his laws. If he said you can't be gay and then forced us to not be gay (by means of creating us so that our DNA completely denied the notion to be gay) then that would be tyranny. Now you say he is forcing us to not be gay by condemning us to hell. Well one God is merciful and if you repent he will definitely grant you heaven if you sinned. Second hell is not necessarily fire and brimstone, it is purely just separation from God, so if you want to be homosexual over being with God then you are granted what you want, separation from God, or hell. Also I'm not God so I'm not sure how high homosexuality ranks on God's list of sins, you very well could be homosexual and have acted in that manner but God in his infinite mercy would overlook (depending on how small it is to him) that minor transgression. Then again homosexuality may be taught as a mortal sin that you do have to repent so as to be with God.

Homosexuality is just God allowing us to freely choose.

[Anonymous]

I don't believe that God created people to be homosexuals. The Bible does talk about God "giving them over" also translated as "abandoning" people to homosexuality in Romans. That is, God gives them free will and allows them to engage in homosexuality, but those actions still invoke judgment.

Even if there is a genetic component to homosexuality, that still wouldn't make it okay in my opinion. Certain genes increase the probability that individuals will murder others, or rape others. That doesn't mean that murder or rape is okay. Also, after the fall, sin ruptured creation in very real ways, introducing disease and sickness into the world, including genetic diseases such as hemophilia and other genetic maladies. In which case, it is possible, in my mind, that the genes that lead to a person's affinity for a certain immoral behavior, whatever it may be, were not part of God's original intent but were instead a consequence of sin's effects on creation. Even if homosexual attraction is genetically influenced, it would only increase the temptation of such activity, and such temptation should be resisted.

~Anonymous, not wanting to continue the homosexuality debate, because he's already had it before on this forum, and he doesn't think it should be the primary focus of the discussion.

[Taeblewalker]

Regarding "Original sin caused disease, etc." I find it baffling that people believe that the universe was changed so radically by something so insignificant as the actions of people. Our planet has been here for billions of years, and we have been here for a tiny fraction of that. I'm sure the dinosaurs had diseases long before we were here. But I realize I'm talking about scientific evidence for an Earth that wasn't made last Tuesday, so some folks simply won't agree.

[flameslayer93]

Removing the hocus pocus from why God let people kill him on a cross...

The only way that humanity could be saved st this point was to sacrifice a pure one.
None existed.
God decided that his offspring (Jesus) would be the only suitable sacrifice.
At this point Jesus is born and lives purely for God.
The people kill him, and Jesus calls it the sacrifice for humanity.

Now historically, Jesus was being persecuted and was going to be killed. Jesus just decided that he'd call himself a sacrifice (it was the old you cant fire me I quit gag).

[Lazy Orang]

Originally Posted by Anonymous

On the homosexuality issue specifically, it also stems from the fact that God created men and women complimentarily with different strengths and weaknesses. They are both equal, they are just suited for different things and different tasks. These differences exist so that a man and a woman are designed to be together and compliment each other, helping one another throughout life, within the institution of marriage. Sex, in its proper context, is a sort of emotional and spiritual glue that binds the husband and wife even closer to one another. In addition, it also allows the husband and wife to participate in a small way in the creation of life. As a result, homosexuality involves a rejection of God's standards for sexual activity, a rejection of the way in which God created human beings as gendered, and a rejection of the way God designed and intended healthy marriage and sexual relationships to be, since they are intended to be between a man and a woman.

I guess it also comes down to the fact that I am willing to trust God's omniscience, (all-knowingness), over my fractured, limited point of view and ability to reason. I'm willing to trust his "Because I said so." and you aren't.

Regarding why Christ had to die, I've stated it as best I can. I think the communication problem is my fault, since you still seem to be confused, but I tried to articulate it as best I can and honestly can't really think of a better way to explain it that you'll understand. I'm deeply sorry about that.

The thing is, homosexuality is real, it is inbuilt, and many gay and lesbian couples truly love each other - what right has God to call that a sin?

Originally Posted by greygnarl

If this is the case then why did he create homosexuals?

Precisely.

Originally Posted by MegaSilver

I would like to point out that not all Christians think homosexuality is as bad as it used to be considered, especially considering there's little to no mention of it in the New Testament.

It's still the same God, and this one isn't change by context.

Originally Posted by flameslayer93

Some argue that homosexuality is a choice, as opposed to inborn nature. I believe Anon himself said this to be his belief at an earlier part of this thread.

That opinion is flat out WRONG - look it up.

Originally Posted by Crixus33

Would you agree it would be dictatorial to not provide us with free will? If then if homosexual tendencies are genetic it is one of the ways God is allowing us to have free will. If they didn't have at least the choice to act on their homosexuality, then God would definitely be a dictator. But he gave us free choice, so if he has to give us brains (and therefore DNA) that can choose to act contrary to his laws. If he said you can't be gay and then forced us to not be gay (by means of creating us so that our DNA completely denied the notion to be gay) then that would be tyranny. Now you say he is forcing us to not be gay by condemning us to hell. Well one God is merciful and if you repent he will definitely grant you heaven if you sinned. Second hell is not necessarily fire and brimstone, it is purely just separation from God, so if you want to be homosexual over being with God then you are granted what you want, separation from God, or hell. Also I'm not God so I'm not sure how high homosexuality ranks on God's list of sins, you very well could be homosexual and have acted in that manner but God in his infinite mercy would overlook (depending on how small it is to him) that minor transgression. Then again homosexuality may be taught as a mortal sin that you do have to repent so as to be with God.

Homosexuality is just God allowing us to freely choose.

No, if God wasn't cool with it, the kindest thing would just be to not create people with those urges. Instead, he creates people with those urges, then tells them that if they act on them they should be hated, killed, separated from his 'love', and possibly eternally tortured. Can you say despot? He's starting to sound a bit like the Party from 1984 - breaking people because he can.

Originally Posted by Anonymous

I don't believe that God created people to be homosexuals. The Bible does talk about God "giving them over" also translated as "abandoning" people to homosexuality in Romans. That is, God gives them free will and allows them to engage in homosexuality, but those actions still invoke judgment.

Even if there is a genetic component to homosexuality, that still wouldn't make it okay in my opinion. Certain genes increase the probability that individuals will murder others, or rape others. That doesn't mean that murder or rape is okay. Also, after the fall, sin ruptured creation in very real ways, introducing disease and sickness into the world, including genetic diseases such as hemophilia and other genetic maladies. In which case, it is possible, in my mind, that the genes that lead to a person's affinity for a certain immoral behavior, whatever it may be, were not part of God's original intent but were instead a consequence of sin's effects on creation. Even if homosexual attraction is genetically influenced, it would only increase the temptation of such activity, and such temptation should be resisted.

~Anonymous, not wanting to continue the homosexuality debate, because he's already had it before on this forum, and he doesn't think it should be the primary focus of the discussion.

Homosexuality IS NOT LIKE MURDER AND RAPE! Full stop! It hurts no one, unless God punishes them, and then it's his fault. Murder and rape do.

Also, likening homosexuality to murder, rape and diseases is the most offensive thing I've read on this site. How dare you? However, I now know your opinions, that logic won't change your mind, and that I can put you down as a religious bigot.

Originally Posted by Taeblewalker

Regarding "Original sin caused disease, etc." I find it baffling that people believe that the universe was changed so radically by something so insignificant as the actions of people. Our planet has been here for billions of years, and we have been here for a tiny fraction of that. I'm sure the dinosaurs had diseases long before we were here. But I realize I'm talking about scientific evidence for an Earth that wasn't made last Tuesday, so some folks simply won't agree.

Yeah, Adam and Eve and Original Sin just doesn't work with evolution and scientific fact, and you can't have Christianity without it. Really, a Christian evolutionist doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Originally Posted by flameslayer93

Removing the hocus pocus from why God let people kill him on a cross...

The only way that humanity could be saved st this point was to sacrifice a pure one.
None existed.
God decided that his offspring (Jesus) would be the only suitable sacrifice.
At this point Jesus is born and lives purely for God.
The people kill him, and Jesus calls it the sacrifice for humanity.

Now historically, Jesus was being persecuted and was going to be killed. Jesus just decided that he'd call himself a sacrifice (it was the old you cant fire me I quit gag).

This is the best and funniest description of Christ I've ever heard.

[flameslayer93]

LazyO, your replying to my having given a neutral answer to a question. Any reason?

(This was the homosexuality bit, not my description of Jesus' death).

[Crixus33]

Originally Posted by Lazy Orang

No, if God wasn't cool with it, the kindest thing would just be to not create people with those urges. Instead, he creates people with those urges, then tells them that if they act on them they should be hated, killed, separated from his 'love', and possibly eternally tortured. Can you say despot? He's starting to sound a bit like the Party from 1984 - breaking people because he can.

So he wouldn't be dictatorial if he didn't give us free will? So it would be kinder for him to not give us the ability to choose?

Also, the Church's stance on most of the stuff in genesis is that it could very well be legend, we aren't sure as the human authors that wrote genesis weren't there to experience what happened and as a result genesis is just supposed to be a way to guide us to certain truths God has revealed to us. That is why the Church can believe in both, genesis tells us God created man because he loves us and wants to share his love, evolution just tells us a way he might have created us.

[Anonymous]

Lazy, I view homosexuality as a moral violation of God's law. So are rape and murder, so is theft, so is heterosexual lust, so is disobeying your parents. It's not the same sin as rape or murder, but it carries with it the same punishment, because at root it is a rejection of God's law. I don't believe it is caused by genetics, but if it is caused by genetics, I don't believe that God put it there, and I was explaining how even if it was genetically influenced as you asserted it would not be God's intention. I think it should be noted that I only answered the question after you repeatedly raised the issue over multiple posts. I suspect you may have guessed that since I believe the Bible is true, I might not agree with homosexuality. So I think the idea that "Now I know what you really stand for!" is a little bit disingenuous. It's not as though I went out of my way to raise the issue and was looking for an opportunity to bring it up. You were the one who kept pushing the issue. I simply responded to your questions after you prodded me multiple times.

If my fidelity to God's word makes me a religious bigot in your book, there's not really much I can do about it, but I'm not going to lie and say that I don't believe God's word, because in the end he's the one I'll have to answer to, not you. I think at this point, I've elucidated God's standards for sexual activity multiple times, and the fact that violating those standards does result in emotional and spiritual effects. You reject that premise. That's fine. I don't see much point in repeating the same thing I've stated multiple times to you and PGS earlier in the thread. I've tried to conduct myself in a respectful way throughout. I hope at the very least, that this thread caused you to think about these issues more fully, and I hope that someday you come to know the God who is just, who is good, and who loves you.