• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

So What's Wrong with the Christian View of Homosexuality?

The Baron said:
1 Corinthians 6:18

Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a person commits are outside the body, but whoever sins sexually, sins against their own body.
Click to expand...

Lets take Ephesians 6:5

Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.
Click to expand...

Are you willing to admit that morality demands slaves obey their masters? Can you honestly claim that any ethical statement regarding slavery other than "it shouldn't exit" is correct? Now I'm sure that you have some explanation why that passage doesn't condone slavery. It probably involves quoting some other passages about we are all equal before god and discussing the socio-historical context when it was written.

The problem is that said explanation doesn't involve the same biblical literalism standard you apply to homosexuality. In fact, it its a very modern concept that was created because society disowned slavery. Slavery is so immoral that any religion which stands for righteousness must reject it by default, regardless of any words on a page. The bible is human creation that is a patchwork of stories and parables written by many authors and translated or edited by even more. Its much more believable that humans could made a mistake in writing or understanding a book than it is that the divine could condone slavery.

Bottom line, stop pretending that you don't interpret the bible without the inclusion of modern moral reasoning. Its the only logical way to avoid justifying depravity.
 
Peter Grimm said:
I think there is some debate as to what causes homosexuality... I say this fully realizing that it's not PC to say anything but "they were born that way."

As for homosexuality not hurting anyone... I would agree that lesbians don't, but aren't gay men the reason AIDS spread back in the 80's?
Click to expand...

Since homosexuality has been around in the virtually the same %'s since the beginning of human history it is foolish to ask if something "causes it". It's obvious that being HUMAN causes it in a % of humans. It is a part of all our beings and is as much apart of the human race as heterosexuality is. Gays have been shunned because they are a minority and that is also a part of human nature. To hate people for being "different". Only education from a young age can prevent this hatred and I fear you got shorted.
 
ecofarm said:
AIDS spread, that's what virus does. Let's not pretend that gay people made AIDS. Anyway, how does the presence of AIDS in the world hurt you? Safe sex is your responsibility, not society's. For me, we get tested first and use protection at least until the second test months later. If that doesn't fly for a woman, then she doesn't have an E-ticket and needs to go to a different ride.
Click to expand...

It hurts the people who get aids.
 
Your Star said:
Because there is nothing wrong with homosexuality, anything that says differently is a lie. And religious beliefs that say otherwise are wrong, and in my mind sinful themselves because they breed hate, inequality, and contempt.
Click to expand...

Human beings breed hate, inequality and contempt in all ways because of our fall from grace. There is no human alive that does not feel hate and does not treat others unequally and with contempt, because we are all sinners, banished from the Garden of Eden. The law of God is inviolate; what Christians choose to do to their fellow man in response to it can be good or evil, but God's law is not evil.

Homosexuality violates the natural purpose of sex, which is to create new life and bond the two sexual partners spiritually. Homosexuality seeks to have one without the other, and thus has neither. Intertwining of emotions is not the same as spiritual union, and this is where those who are in favor of homosexual unions are in error.

Homosexuals are dealing as best they can with a situation not of their making. I honestly believe that few people choose their orientation. However, I also believe that they can also choose to see the feelings they have for what they are; a tendency that pulls them away from God if they choose to indulge in them. A person must be in harmony with the will of God in order to be fulfilled, to not be so is to be in a state of sin. No impure thing can stand in the presence of God, so for us to see what Catholics call the beatific vision, we must be in perfect harmony with God's will. We cannot do this of ourselves, we must have the sacrifice our Lord Jesus Christ, the new Adam, and the intercession of his mother, queen of heaven, the Virgin Mary, and the prayers of all the saints, to aid us.

You may certainly reject God; that is your choice. But beware that your choice will have consequences, and just as every person hates, so too will every person be judged.

However, the most amazing thing about the Christian God is his endless capacity for forgiveness. That's what the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross was all about. The Lamb of God, who took away the sins of the world. There is no sin that anyone can commit (save blasphemy against the Holy Spirit) that cannot be forgiven you if you ask it. Don't harden your heart because you think you can't be forgiven. Forgiveness is, by far, what God does best.
 
iguanaman said:
Since homosexuality has been around in the virtually the same %'s since the beginning of human history it is foolish to ask if something "causes it".
Click to expand...

How would we even go about trying to reliably measure that?
 
rathi said:
If you want to call a something immoral, you must demonstrate how it causes harm.
Click to expand...
Sin disfigures the soul. No sin is private and without consequence. Sexual acts of an unfruitful nature harm the participants because they violate the natural law of man and thus interrupt the natural state of grace that man would have with God were he free of sin.

I'm grownup enough to realize that it's only a matter of time before SSM is the law of the land in all 50 states; Roe v. Wade proved that. There's plenty legal justification for it, just as there is legal justification for just about any social cause one would wish to take up. I just want to warn you all that just because it's legal doesn't make it right, and you violate the law of God at the peril of your own soul. Scoff if you like, this is not about me vs. you. I'm not your enemy. Friendship with the world makes God your enemy.
 
ChuckBerry said:
Sin disfigures the soul. No sin is private and without consequence. Sexual acts of an unfruitful nature harm the participants because they violate the natural law of man and thus interrupt the natural state of grace that man would have with God were he free of sin.
Click to expand...

So, according to that line of reasoning, should my wife abstain from sex with me since I have had a vasectomy?
 
ChuckBerry said:
Human beings breed hate, inequality and contempt in all ways because of our fall from grace. There is no human alive that does not feel hate and does not treat others unequally and with contempt, because we are all sinners, banished from the Garden of Eden. The law of God is inviolate; what Christians choose to do to their fellow man in response to it can be good or evil, but God's law is not evil.

Homosexuality violates the natural purpose of sex, which is to create new life and bond the two sexual partners spiritually. Homosexuality seeks to have one without the other, and thus has neither. Intertwining of emotions is not the same as spiritual union, and this is where those who are in favor of homosexual unions are in error.

Homosexuals are dealing as best they can with a situation not of their making. I honestly believe that few people choose their orientation. However, I also believe that they can also choose to see the feelings they have for what they are; a tendency that pulls them away from God if they choose to indulge in them. A person must be in harmony with the will of God in order to be fulfilled, to not be so is to be in a state of sin. No impure thing can stand in the presence of God, so for us to see what Catholics call the beatific vision, we must be in perfect harmony with God's will. We cannot do this of ourselves, we must have the sacrifice our Lord Jesus Christ, the new Adam, and the intercession of his mother, queen of heaven, the Virgin Mary, and the prayers of all the saints, to aid us.

You may certainly reject God; that is your choice. But beware that your choice will have consequences, and just as every person hates, so too will every person be judged.

However, the most amazing thing about the Christian God is his endless capacity for forgiveness. That's what the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross was all about. The Lamb of God, who took away the sins of the world. There is no sin that anyone can commit (save blasphemy against the Holy Spirit) that cannot be forgiven you if you ask it. Don't harden your heart because you think you can't be forgiven. Forgiveness is, by far, what God does best.
Click to expand...

Me being gay isn't something that needs to be forgiven, homosexuality is not wrong, it harms no one, and accepting myself has brought me great happiness. Do you really believe that a God who made a world so diverse, that He would make people exactly the same in this one certain way, or even want people to act in this one certain way? It just makes no kind of sense.

Also sex has more than one purpose, and it is beautiful, and there is nothing wrong with it as long as no one is hurt.
 
ChuckBerry said:
You should never have gotten a vasectomy.
Click to expand...

So what about if a woman is barren and infertile through no choice of her own? should she abstain from sex because she is "having sex of an unfruitful nature"? How about post-menopausal women are they obligated to a life of abstinence because they are no longer fruitful? And to head off the sacred vows of marriage cop out- what if the woman was a widower and post-menapausal.

What I do not get about so many individual interpretations of the sin of homosexuality is why it is elevated to such an extreme. On one hand many will claim we are all sinners but then turn right around and whitewash other sins while denigrating homosexuality incessantly. If there was some equality in the treatment of these so called sins then it might not be so bad, but all too often it just seems as if a few biblical passages are used to rationalize an unwarranted degree of hatred compared to other sins. If you are supposed to love the sinner and hate the sin, then why are not all sins treated with an equal amount of vitriol, and why are some sinners apparently more hated than others? What happened to "Judge not lest ye be judged"? worry about your own damn selves, and if there is some god and some judgement let him sort it out. If one is going to judge at least be consistent with your judging - come down on me for my sloth, or for my adulterous behavior or any other "sins" (disclaimer: I do not believe in the concept of sin) that I may have. Put each and every one of us on the same level as you would put the homosexuals among us - at least pursue and condemn all immorality equally just for consistency sake. I am not homosexual- but in the eyes of many Christians I am still a sinner - hate my sins just as much as you hate homosexuality. (disclaimer 2: this paragraph is not speaking for everyone, but rather a generalization for what is seen all too frequently).
 
The Baron said:
(from the Catholic Church should wage war againstlabels, NOT homosexuality thread)

This was the opening post from another thread and I’ve read many like it over the years. It always strikes me as a little odd how unbelievers seem to inherently understand what a Christian’s view on homosexuality is, what’s wrong with it and what Christians should believe when--clearly--they don’t have a clue.

What strikes me as frightening is when Christians clearly have no clue what the Bible says about homosexuality.

To the very best of my knowledge, the topic of homosexuality is only addressed by the following biblical verses.

Old Testament

a) “You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.” (Leviticus 18: 22)

b) “If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltiness is upon them.” (Leviticus 20: 13)

NOTE: The Old Testament applied onlyto the people of Israel during Old Testament times. Gentile nations were held to a differentstandard. See Amos 1 & 2.

New Testament

c) “For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.” (Romans 1: 26-27)

d) “Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, noridolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.” (1 Corinthians6:9-11)

e) “Many will follow their sensuality, and because of them the way of the truth will be maligned…and if He condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to destruction by reducing them toashes, having made them an example to those who would live ungodly lives thereafter.” (2 Peter 2: 2 and 6)

f) “just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire. Yet in the same way these men, also by dreaming, defile the flesh, and reject authority, and revile angelic majesties.” (Jude 1: 7-8)

And while it is important to understand what the Bible says, it is also important to recognize what the Bible does not say. As such there are some things that we may must recognize from the above.

1. God hates the homosexual act (sex), not the homosexual.

2. The homosexual act is a sin.

3. While the homosexual act is a sin it is not some kind of “super-sin” as some seem to understand it to be. Leviticus 18 states that the homosexual act is an “abomination”. The original word used there is transliterated “toebah”.

And God uses this word elsewhere in the Scriptures to describe other thingsHe hates, such as:

Proverbs 6: 16-19

There are six things which the Lord hates,
Yes, seven which are an abomination (toebah) to Him:
Haughty eyes, a lying tongue,
And hands that shed innocent blood,
A heart that devises wicked plans,
Feet that run rapidly to evil,
A false witness who utters lies,
And one who spreads strife among brothers.

In other words, the homosexual act is as much of anabomination to God as haughtiness, lying, murder, devilish schemes, those whodon’t hesitate to do that which is evil and jerks.

Even I have been guilty of some of those.

4. Gay folks who are saved are going to Heaven. Gay folks who are not are going to Hell. Works the exact same way with straight folks (John 3:16)

5. The gospel accounts do not reveal if Jesus ever spoke about homosexuality and some would argue that since Jesus did not specifically condemn homosexuality then it must have been acceptable to Him. However, the gospels are not and were never intended to be acomprehensive collection of all the things Jesus said and did.

However, we do know that in the gospels Jesus only spoke about intimate relationships in terms of husbands and wives (Matthew 19: 4-6 & Mark 10:6-9).

This is why Believers hold to marriage as only between one man and one woman.

6. There is nothing in the Bible--that I’m aware of--that forbids the homosexual orientation (emotional longing for same sex relationship / sexual attraction) and requires heterosexuality.

However the Bible does require sexual purity (one man /one woman within the covenant of marriage).

7. There is nothing in the Bible that requires Christians to hate, malign or shun gay-folks as some have believed (both Believers and non-Believers).

So what is wrong with that?
Click to expand...

You're wrong about the Leviticus quotes, Baron. I think we've been down this road before, but here's the post that I have presented several times at DP:

CaptainCourtesy said:
My argument, presented, is demonstrating why my religion, Judaism (and my sect, Reform Judaism) sees no issue with homosexuality or SSM.

First, here is my treatment on the two Leviticus passages:

Leviticus 18:22: "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."
Leviticus 20:13: "If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."


There are so many errors in the interpretation of these passages. One has to understand the section of the Torah that they were taken, what the context was, and the translations of the actual words. These passages cannot stand by themselves and mean what they were supposed to mean.

The section of the Torah where these passages were taken refers to codes of holiness and purity. It describes ways that God wants the Hebrews to be different from the Pagans. The passages that surround these two include passages about bestiality and incest, other unclean/unholy acts that were performed by Pagans. Now, we must first look at the word "abomination". This is taken from the Hebrew word "to'ebah". The actual translation of this is NOT abomination, but ritually unclean, something that fits perfectly with the codes of that section of the Bible. So, we now have it not an abomination, but just something that is ritually unclean.

Next, since this passage is included in the codes of holiness section, it refers to acts that Pagans do, that God wants the Hebrews to separate from. One of these acts is engaging in anal sex with male prostitutes. Now, even if we look at the issue, globally, Hebrew translations refer to anal sex acts; no mention of homosexual orientation or homosexual relationships are mentioned. At all.

Now, moving on to the actual words. Since Hebrews believed that the Torah was spoken directly to Moses from God, one must wonder why the passage reads like this:
"Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." If God was saying something against homosexuality in men, He would have just said this: ""Thou shalt not lie with mankind: it is abomination." Why the "as womankind" part? Think about it. A man should not lie with another man as if HE were a woman. Sexuality in the Torah is always presented as male dominant/female subservient. Hebrew scholars see this as meaning that if men have sexual relations, NEITHER shall be passive ("as womankind"). Also, since this was a norm of the time, this does not apply to today, anyway.

So, what can we conclude from the actual Hebrew interpretations and the context of what was being discussed? Firstly, the entire section refers to holiness codes, separating the Hebrews from the Pagans. Secondly, the word "abomination" is not accurate; ritually unclean IS accurate. This eliminates any punishment. Thirdly, only anal sex, probably in the context of male prostitutes is prohibited; homosexual orientation has no mention and has no such prohibitions. Fourthly, IF homosexual behavior does occur, neither man can be the passive (woman) in the relationship. Fifthly, this only applies to ancient Hebrews. Sixthly, lesbian relationships are not mentioned at all and, therefore have no prohibitions.

Now, there is MORE evidence that the prostitution theory holds water. Leviticus 18:3 says this: "After the doings of the land of Egypt, wherein ye dwelt, shall ye not do: and after the doings of the land of Canaan, whither I bring you, shall ye not do: neither shall ye walk in their ordinances." God is saying that the Hebrews are NOT to behave like the Pagans (Canaanites and Egyptians). In both cultures, ritual gay sex with male prostitutes was common.

Now, my discussion of Sodom and Gommorah:

So everyone knows, Sodom and Gommorah was not about homosexuality at all. It was hospitality and protection. God punished those two cities because they were inhospitable, including towards his two angels that he sent. The "sodomy" that he was referring was NOT homosexuality, but was RAPE. The homosexuality misinterpretation comes from the fact that the angry mob wanted to rape (male homosexuality) the angels that visited Lot. This was a very common method of humiliation that was used at the time, especially amongst Pagans towards their enemies. During this time period, we had a patriarchal society, so, with the men in charge, humiliating and intimidating them was more effective. God's warning is that sodomy... RAPE, especially homosexual RAPE, is sinful... hence his destruction of those two cities where that practice occurred. The story says nothing about consentual homosexual behavior.

So, in conclusion, my religion sees nothing wrong with homosexuality based on the context of the passages, the cultures of the times, and the actual translations of the words. Based on these passages, there is nothing in the Bible that prohibits the gay sexual orientation, nor SSM.

referring posts:
http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/99998-homosexuality-sinful-and-unnatural-25.html
http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/99998-homosexuality-sinful-and-unnatural-48.html#post1059558797
Click to expand...
 
ChuckBerry said:
You should never have gotten a vasectomy.
Click to expand...

Ok, so I shouldn't have had the vasectomy. God forgive me, Hail Marry and so on and so forth.

Now what? Should my wife abstain from having sex with me? Should married couples that are infertile due to no fault of their own abstain?

ETA: I see marduc beat me to it.
 
ChuckBerry said:
Sin disfigures the soul. No sin is private and without consequence. Sexual acts of an unfruitful nature harm the participants because they violate the natural law of man and thus interrupt the natural state of grace that man would have with my God were he free of sin.

I'm grownup enough to realize that it's only a matter of time before SSM is the law of the land in all 50 states; Roe v. Wade proved that. There's plenty legal justification for it, just as there is legal justification for just about any social cause one would wish to take up. I just want to warn you all that just because it's legal doesn't make it right, and you violate the law of my God at the peril of your own soul. Scoff if you like, this is not about me vs. you. I'm not your enemy. Friendship with the world makes my God your enemy.
Click to expand...

Good to know. Thank god :)mrgreen:) that we've got alternatives.
 
marduc said:
So what about if a woman is barren and infertile through no choice of her own? should she abstain from sex because she is "having sex of an unfruitful nature"? How about post-menopausal women are they obligated to a life of abstinence because they are no longer fruitful? And to head off the sacred vows of marriage cop out- what if the woman was a widower and post-menapausal.
Click to expand...

So long as the sexual act is not, as Catholics put it, "closed to fruitfulness", the act is licit. In other words, if through no fault of their own a married couple cannot conceive, they are fine in the eyes of God. An example of this is in both Old and New Testaments, with barren and old Sarah conceiving and giving birth to Issac, and barren and old Elizabeth conceiving and giving birth to John the Baptist.

But apart from these examples, if one demonstrates faith in the will of God and allows him to work through them, rather than prevent his will through unnatural barriers, they are without sin.
 
Your Star said:
Do you really believe that a God who made a world so diverse, that He would make people exactly the same in this one certain way, or even want people to act in this one certain way?
Click to expand...

What did God make, and what did man make?
 
ChuckBerry said:
What did God make, and what did man make?
Click to expand...

It might take some time to research each item, but I am confident that -

I can prove that man made the computer upon which I am typing this.
I can prove that man made the car I drove today.
I can prove that man made the books I read today.
I can prove that man made the ipod I listened to today.
And I can prove that man made the entire infrastructure of the society in which I live.

What can you prove (as opposed to claim) that God made?
 
Leo said:
It might take some time to research each item, but I am confident that -

I can prove that man made the computer upon which I am typing this.
I can prove that man made the car I drove today.
I can prove that man made the books I read today.
I can prove that man made the ipod I listened to today.
And I can prove that man made the entire infrastructure of the society in which I live.

What can you prove (as opposed to claim) that God made?
Click to expand...

My question was directed to a person who has faith in God. I have no proofs that would satisfy a person who does not believe in God.
 
Last edited:
Dr. Chuckles said:
lol, yes, because everything some random person with a blog claims on the internet must be true~!!! There is actually a law about it ...
Click to expand...

Do your own research then. The conclusion is the same.
 
iguanaman said:
Do your own research then. The conclusion is the same.
Click to expand...

really, then why don't you cite something more credible than an unsourced blog?
 
Peter Grimm said:
It hurts the people who get aids.
Click to expand...

And?

Gays did not make AIDS any more than they made cancer. There are many STDs presumably spread by heteros and we're not tryin' to ban them.
 
specklebang said:
It is proper for Christians to follow their own principles. Therefore, Christians should not be homosexuals.
Click to expand...

There are about a million things Christians should not be, most notably divorced (half are), adulterous (70% are), liars (100% are), and yet there is so much focus by SOME Christians on homosexuality.

I think it is hard to argue that if some of these Christian churches railed again adultery and lying as much as they railed against homosexuality, their churches would be empty. The simple fact is that there is money and power in naming a enemy and claiming the need to fight it, as long as that threat is from people who are not within the group. Unfortunately, organized religion succeeds and fails under the same dynamics as any other social organization, the one's that can get their people excited about something do better than the one's that don't, so these successul organizations thrive and others die, but the success is not dependent on how well they follow the faith, but instead on how well they motivate the faithful.

A church that said you are no better than anyone, no more or less sinful than people who do not belong that church, no more or less likely to go to Hell than people who do not belong to that church, would fail as a church because it would not be promising anything special for it's members. While a church that tells it's members that THEY are special, they are saved, and that all others will face hellfire, will do well.

The actual, simple message of Jesus, accept me and my teachings and live as I live as an example to others is simply not a very profitable way to get butts in chairs and cash in the collection plates, there is more money in saying you must stop the evildoers while ignoring the evil in your own hearts.

I see so much anger towards so-called sinners (who are not of the church that expresses the anger) and yet Jesus rarely expressed anger in the Bible, and when he did, it was about the leaders of the churches never about sinners sinning.

I love Jesus, but I despise much of what is done in His name.

if someone tells you to act against others rather than work on your own soul, they are selling something and you should not buy it.
 
ChuckBerry said:
What did God make, and what did man make?
Click to expand...

God made LGBT people, man wrote the Bible.

There is nothing wrong with sex for non-procreative purposes, and there is nothing wrong with being gay. It does not harm anyone, and in fact the belief itself that those things are wrong are inherently harmful.

There is nothing wrong with love, it's God's greatest gift, and love between a woman and a woman, or a man and a man, is just as beautiful as love between a woman and a man.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom