• 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!

Is Homosexuality sinful and/or unnatural?

Is homosexuality wrong and/or unnatural?


  • Total voters
    128
It is not the fault of the Bible that MAN has issues with the truth written inside.
Right. But you don't have any evidence that it was written by anyone other than man. Consequently, it's a legitimate argument that the Bible was written by power hungry men who wanted to scare people into obeying them.
 
Right. But you don't have any evidence that it was written by anyone other than man. Consequently, it's a legitimate argument that the Bible was written by power hungry men who wanted to scare people into obeying them.

I know it was written by man, no doubt. The finger of God did not come down and write it for us. The Gospels were not written to scare anyone, it preaches the exact opposite. We have already been over this. We are also getting way WAY of topic.

So I will leave you with that.
 
So you don't think homosexuality is sinful in Christian regards, BlackDog, even though there are about ten verses against it? Let us ignore the verses on adultery, too. Or fornication, lust, etc. But no, suddenly the verses are crystal clear...

The things people will say to ignore scripture...
 
So you don't think homosexuality is sinful in Christian regards, BlackDog, even though there are about ten verses against it? Let us ignore the verses on adultery, too. Or fornication, lust, etc. But no, suddenly the verses are crystal clear...

The things people will say to ignore scripture...

You have got to be kidding me?

Did you read what I posted in the loft or are you ignorant of English? Did you read the PM I sent you or are you unable to read?

Here this should have clear it up for you...

First off let me say being "gay" is not a sin, no place does the New or Old Testament say it is. This is not an attack on homosexuals nor is it a condemnation of homosexuality as we are all sinners.

Romans 3:10-11 10 As it is written: “There is no one righteous, not even one; 11 there is no one who understands; there is no one who seeks God.

According to the Old Testament sodomy is considered a sin or being ritually unclean. According to recent surveys roughly 67% to 80% of male homosexuals practice sodomy.

Leviticus: Lv. 18:223: "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It
is an abomination."


20:13: "If a man lies with a male as with a woman,
both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to
death."


Lesbianism or acts of lesbianism is not even mentioned in the Old Testament in any form. Going by the original text and Jewish interpretation it is not even considered fornication or adultery as it involves no penetration by the male phallus.

Everything in the OT covering sexual uncleanliness or sin seems to revolve around penetration by the male phallus and nothing else.

In the New Testament sexual acts involving men with men and women with women are defined clearly. Even when taking into account translation errors from the Greek, it is plain in it's condemnation of said acts. It goes beyond merely the male phallus and calls them "unnatural" etc.

1 Cor 6:9-10: "Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom
of God? Neither the sexually immoral, nor idolators, nor the effeminate,
nor those who lie with males...will inherit the kingdom of God."


Romans 1:26-27: "For this reason God handed them over to dishonorable
passions, and their women exchanged their natural use for the unnatural.
And similaly the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned with
desire for one another, males working impropriety on males, and receiving
in themselves the pay which was proper for their wandering."


1 Tim 1:9-10: "Knowing this,that the law is not there for the righteous
man, but for lawless ones...sexually loose, those who lie with males...."


Jude 7: "Just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which
likewise acted immorally and indulged in unnatural lust, serve as an
example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire."


Here in lies the debate...

Being gay is not a sin, but according to the OT sodomy is. According to the NT all sexual acts out of wedlock are a sin including homosexuality in or out of wedlock. Jesus himself said even thinking or contemplating an act forbidden is a sin.

Mark 9: 43 If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out.

Now Jesus laid down and defined that marriage is about a man and a woman, period. In reference he was talking about divorce, this does not however negate him defining what marriage is supposed to be according to God in the Biblical sense.

Mark 10:9-12But from the beginning of creation, 'God made them male and female.' 7 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, 8 and the two shall become one flesh.' So they are no longer two but one flesh. 9 What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder." 10 And in the house the disciples asked him again about this matter. 11 And he said to them, "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another, commits adultery against her; 12 and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery."

So how can a Christian church marry two men or woman when it is clearly against the Bibles commands? How can a pastor, priest etc condone it?

I belive gay marraige should be accepted in our secular society as law. Equal treatment under the law is to important.

What I don't understand is how Christian's can ignore entire swaths of the Bible when it is biblically clear on what is and is not permissible.
 
Last edited:
No you got it wrong, lol.

Being "gay" is not a sin, in any way. Acting on that or lusting after someone of the same sex is a sin. According to the Bible, sodomy in the OT, and all sexual immorality in the NT is a sin or wrong.

Your position can be confusing.

If you give into the temptation, and claim yourself gay, then it is a sin. As well as the acts. It is not acts alone, but the giving into the thoughts and giving into the perversion. Otherwise, how can perversion exist according to Christianity?

So you think it isn't wrong to be homosexual and support it and believe and "be" it, but it's only wrong if you physically do the acts.

Do you think only physical actions can be deemed sin in regards to Christianity, but not thoughts/belief? That is different from temptation because you fight such immoral notions.
 
I know it was written by man, no doubt. The finger of God did not come down and write it for us. The Gospels were not written to scare anyone, it preaches the exact opposite. We have already been over this. We are also getting way WAY of topic.

So I will leave you with that.

We are off topic, but the point still remains - the Bible teaches "love and peace". However, the Bible also teaches "obey me or you're going to hell". This latter lesson is mighty useful for power hungry men and in fact has been used to hold power over people for centuries and give MEN great influence over nations and populations. The idea that it was made for this purpose is not to ridiculous.
 
Your position can be confusing.

If you give into the temptation, and claim yourself gay, then it is a sin. As well as the acts. It is not acts alone, but the giving into the thoughts and giving into the perversion. Otherwise, how can perversion exist according to Christianity?

So you think it isn't wrong to be homosexual and support it and believe and "be" it, but it's only wrong if you physically do the acts.

Do you think only physical actions can be deemed sin in regards to Christianity, but not thoughts/belief? That is different from temptation because you fight such immoral notions.

Nothing confusing about it. Being attracted to the same sex is not a sin. No place in the Bible does it say it is. ACTING on it in thought or action is the sin.

It is not that difficult.
 
We are off topic, but the point still remains - the Bible teaches "love and peace". However, the Bible also teaches "obey me or you're going to hell". This latter lesson is mighty useful for power hungry men and in fact has been used to hold power over people for centuries and give MEN great influence over nations and populations. The idea that it was made for this purpose is not to ridiculous.

The idea of "obey me or burn" is not what it is about. It is about love God above all things and treat others as you wish to be treated, that IS the summation of the law, period.

The assumption is not ridicules, but it is not the point of Christs teaching. It is a guid for spiritual salvation, you have free will you can accept it or not.

My point is when you start throwing things out to fit your life style and choices, where does it end? In the end anything can be justified this way.
 
Nothing confusing about it. Being attracted to the same sex is not a sin. No place in the Bible does it say it is. ACTING on it in thought or action is the sin.

It is not that difficult.

Giving into the devil's temptation is in. The devil's temptation, attraction to the same sex, is from Satan. It is the same when you are tempted to steal. Not giving into the temptation is good, but the temptation comes from Satan.
 
Your position can be confusing.

Not really.

If you give into the temptation, and claim yourself gay, then it is a sin.

How is "claiming you are gay" giving in to temptation? Either you are attracted to men or women, no sin involved in an attraction.

As well as the acts. It is not acts alone, but the giving into the thoughts and giving into the perversion. Otherwise, how can perversion exist according to Christianity?

This has nothing to do directly with attraction. Plenty of gay men and women are gay but good practicing Christians who do not give into the thoughts or physical acts. Makes them no less gay.

So you think it isn't wrong to be homosexual and support it and believe and "be" it, but it's only wrong if you physically do the acts.

I said nothing like this. If you have yet to figure it out, I don't know what to tell you.

Do you think only physical actions can be deemed sin in regards to Christianity, but not thoughts/belief? That is different from temptation because you fight such immoral notions.

Again already covered this.

See above.
 
Giving into the devil's temptation is in. The devil's temptation, attraction to the same sex, is from Satan.

It's from DNA, upbringing and many other factors. We are all born in sin so choose your poison or start throwing the rock since you are sinless obviously.

I choose not to judge people on things they have not done since none of us are righteous, not one.

It is the same when you are tempted to steal. Not giving into the temptation is good, but the temptation comes from Satan.

The temptation comes mostly from mans sinful nature. Satan does not have to do anything.
 
They destroyed one text because it was the only one, let me emphasize the only one out of hundreds that said Jesus was just a man. That's it. The rest are available and were not burned etc.

So your premise is based on flawed information. Which makes the conclusion incorrect as well.

So, they claimed to destroy one text but you can't believe that they might have destroyed more than just that one? We have no way to verify exactly what happened during any of the counsels that decided what went into the Bible and what didn't, so we have no way to know for sure if they decided to keep something that happened in the counsel (such as censorship of unwanted texts/writings) in the counsel and never mention it again and never record it in any records from those meetings.

And, again, we also have no way to truly know if there were other texts/writings that the compilers didn't even know about. Nor do we know every word that Jesus spoke about every matter. We have accounts of a lot of the significant things that he did, but even then, they are mostly from someone else's POV, not Jesus's. We don't know what he was thinking when he talked about things.
 
The idea of "obey me or burn" is not what it is about. It is about love God above all things and treat others as you wish to be treated, that IS the summation of the law, period.

The assumption is not ridicules, but it is not the point of Christs teaching. It is a guid for spiritual salvation, you have free will you can accept it or not.

My point is when you start throwing things out to fit your life style and choices, where does it end? In the end anything can be justified this way.

According to most Christian beliefs, if a person does not believe that Jesus died for our sins, then they are not going to Heaven. Along with this, is generally a mandate to ask for forgiveness for your sins and try not to commit the same sins again. Most Christians believe the only way to Heaven is through Jesus, which is according to the Bible. It doesn't matter how good a person is. That is a control thing. One of the things that has led some people, such as myself, away from Christianity, because I choose to believe that a good God would look into a person's heart and not be so petty as to expect people to believe in a book, such as the Bible, just because people thousands of years ago believed that they were telling others what God wanted and how to get to Heaven. I believe that God does not care what religion people follow or what small petty rules a person obeys, as long as they essentially live by the golden rule, do unto others as you would have them do unto you, and try to love each other. All the rest of the rules, including those about homosexuality and others, seem to me to be something that men would care about, not God. That is why I don't trust the Bible, because it does not fit with what my view of a good God is and it could have easily been manipulated by any of the many people who were responsible for it, from the writers of the text to the compilers and the translators and the changers.
 
And why is that?

Pagans used homosexual rape as humiliation and intimidation 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.
 
So, they claimed to destroy one text but you can't believe that they might have destroyed more than just that one? We have no way to verify exactly what happened during any of the counsels that decided what went into the Bible and what didn't, so we have no way to know for sure if they decided to keep something that happened in the counsel (such as censorship of unwanted texts/writings) in the counsel and never mention it again and never record it in any records from those meetings.

Here we go again with the "what if" they...

We know because they kept really accurate records. The Roman church was real good about that. We have actual eye witness accounts.

Again this was not some closed door secret, it was big news at the time.

I mean if you want to believe in tin foil hattery, be my guest. Don't use it to try and give a conspiracy theory credibility. No proof exists that anything at all was burned, none.

And, again, we also have no way to truly know if there were other texts/writings that the compilers didn't even know about. Nor do we know every word that Jesus spoke about every matter. We have accounts of a lot of the significant things that he did, but even then, they are mostly from someone else's POV, not Jesus's. We don't know what he was thinking when he talked about things.

OK I guess all the history we have of humankind is accurate accept when it involves Christianity. Now we have to know exactly what God was thinking for someone to right down his teachings? :lol:
 
Pagans used homosexual rape as humiliation and intimidation 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.

Thanks CC, had no idea.
 
According to most Christian beliefs, if a person does not believe that Jesus died for our sins, then they are not going to Heaven. Along with this, is generally a mandate to ask for forgiveness for your sins and try not to commit the same sins again. Most Christians believe the only way to Heaven is through Jesus, which is according to the Bible.

This is fairly accurate.

It doesn't matter how good a person is. That is a control thing. One of the things that has led some people, such as myself, away from Christianity, because I choose to believe that a good God would look into a person's heart and not be so petty as to expect people to believe in a book, such as the Bible, just because people thousands of years ago believed that they were telling others what God wanted and how to get to Heaven. I believe that God does not care what religion people follow or what small petty rules a person obeys, as long as they essentially live by the golden rule, do unto others as you would have them do unto you, and try to love each other. All the rest of the rules, including those about homosexuality and others, seem to me to be something that men would care about, not God. That is why I don't trust the Bible, because it does not fit with what my view of a good God is and it could have easily been manipulated by any of the many people who were responsible for it, from the writers of the text to the compilers and the translators and the changers.

So in other words you like so many want to make up your own God based on Christian teachings but ignore most of it because it does not fit in with your lifestyle or whatever.

Heck I could do that to justify anything...

I believe in the golden rule as long as I can have (consensual of course) sex with 16 and 17 year olds who are related too me. And since the rest is just stuff that men wrote down, I can still go to heaven! Since I don't mind people stealing from me, I can steal all I want from them! Hey I like this Nuke, I really can almost justify anything! :doh
 
Last edited:
So in other words you like so many want to make up your own God based on Christian teachings but ignore most of it because it does not fit in with your lifestyle or whatever.

Heck I could do that to justify anything...

I believe in the golden rule as long as I can have (consensual of course) sex with 16 and 17 year olds who are related too me. And since the rest is just stuff that men wrote down, I can still go to heaven! Since I don't mind people stealing from me, I can steal all I want from them! Hey I like this Nuke, I really can almost justify anything! :doh

This is a common misrepresentation of people's words. It's not that people just make up a God to fit with a lifestyle; it's that the God of X religion does not make sense according to their own reason. In other words, it's that some aspect of the Bible or the Koran or some other religious text make them uneasy and hesistant to accept the words inside of them. This is a pretty common saying that illustrates the problem:

Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense. - Buddha

If you think the Christian God and the Bible sound right and you're comfortable believing in them, go right ahead. Maybe God's telling you something that he isn't telling others. But to belittle other beliefs who feel something wrong or uncomfortable with your God and your Bible as just "making up their God to fit with a lifestyle to justify things" is obnoxious and shows an inability to understand and respect how others come to their own conclusions.
 
This is fairly accurate.



So in other words you like so many want to make up your own God based on Christian teachings but ignore most of it because it does not fit in with your lifestyle or whatever.

Heck I could do that to justify anything...

I believe in the golden rule as long as I can have (consensual of course) sex with 16 and 17 year olds who are related too me. And since the rest is just stuff that men wrote down, I can still go to heaven! Since I don't mind people stealing from me, I can steal all I want from them! Hey I like this Nuke, I really can almost justify anything! :doh

Pardon me,I'm the new guy,and I may be mistaken,but are you saying that there is something wrong with making up new gods as one see's fit.
I'm a Discordian and we Discordians do it all the time.

Why should I be limited to believing in some gigantic robe and sandal wearing perpetually pissed off bearded white guy sitting on a throne up in the clouds when I can have a hot babe like ERIS as my personal deity.
Let's face it,no one on this forum has ever proven that THE SUPREME ONENESS OF THE MULTIVERSE is actually the Judeo-Christian God.So my Goddess is just as valid as your God,wouldn't you agree.

Now if you had said "according to your beliefs" I wouldn't be writing this,because then you are stating an opinion.
Everyone has a right to their own opinion (and you know what they say about opinions).
But the above statement you made seems to me that you are stating it as a fact.
An opinion does not necessarily equal a fact.

It seems to me Christians have never had problem a using the Bible to justify things like slavery,ethnic cleansing,religious oppression,land theft,torture,genocide....etc.
It seem all three monotheistic religions has serious "can't play well with others" issues.
You never hear about us Discordians using the Principia Discordia or The Book of Eris as an excuse to commit horrible atrocities on our fellow lifeforms,now do you?
 
Is the following possible?



infalliblebible.jpg
 
That you are still wrong. The Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches did not follow the Protestant revisions, and they continue to base their Old Testament on the Septuagint. The result is that these versions of the the Bible have more Old Testament books than most Protestant versions. Catholic Old Testaments include 1st and 2nd Maccabees, Baruch, Tobit, Judith, The Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), additions to Esther, and the stories of Susanna and Bel and the Dragon which are included in Daniel. Orthodox Old Testaments include these plus 1st and 2nd Esdras, Prayer of Manasseh, Psalm 151 and 3rd Maccabees.

The Protestant, Catholic and Orthodox New Testaments are identical.

You were also talking about much more than just Trent. You were talking about Nicea, but you are trying to avoid that. Need I post the original statement by you?

My point was that the bible was put together by greedy power hungry men. Not God. The fact that the bible was revised by the Council of Trent proves this since acording to every Christian I have talked to the Bible cannot be changed. I admit that they did not originally put the bible together. But they did change it from what it said originally. Be that as it may Nicea was still a council made up of men that chose what went into the bible. Did they die poor by the wayside? Or did they die relatively rich and with honors?
 
They destroyed one text because it was the only one, let me emphasize the only one out of hundreds that said Jesus was just a man. That's it. The rest are available and were not burned etc.

So your premise is based on flawed information. Which makes the conclusion incorrect as well.

How do you know that they only destroyed one?
 
Back
Top Bottom