It could also be understood to mean those who are psychologically incapable of heterosexual relations. As there is nothing wron with the homosexual orientation I ma free to believe God made me this way. Will everyone stop pretneding that the orientation is wrong in itself. You won’t convince me it is.Eunuch - A castrated man… (Mirriam-Webster)
Eunuch’s are people that are not physically able to have sex because of castration.
So what are you trying to prove? That there is an indicator of who will be homosexual and we can correct it if caught in time? What a joke.I’ve read that about 75% of men with same-sex attraction exhibit symptoms that for lack of a better word are “stereotyped”. Common among these men are the lilting, somewhat feminine voice, the flamboyant and very feminine mannerisms and desire for more traditionally feminine interests or professions (ex., dance, theatre, designers, etc.). If it’s not genetic, then what accounts for these striking differences (from heterosexual males) in the majority of gay males? Are these just predispositions that are there from the beginning but can be changed if addressed earlier enough in life or are they a fixed genetic marker that almost always leads to same-sex attraction? Does anyone have any answers or empirically based studies on this narrow question?
As I said in the question, I’m just trying to determine if these similar majority features of gay men are related to a fixed genetic condition (biological) or whether they are just predispositions to same-sex attractions (but not fixed in stone biologically). Jim, you come across so very defensive in all your posts. However, from your responses, It does appear as though you are remaining chaste and that is a good thing. You try so hard to prove that homosexuality is a normal purely biologically determined condition…why does that matter so much to you if you also know (quite rightly) that having sexual relations with someone of the same sex is morally wrong? Be proud that you’ve been given the grace from God to resist actively pursuing this lifestyle and continue to witness that truth to others. God bless.So what are you trying to prove? That there is an indicator of who will be homosexual and we can correct it if caught in time? What a joke.
Because there are those in these forums whoa re trying to insinuate that even being homosexual is wrong. It’s a neutral thing that harms absolutely noone. There can be nothing wrong with it when one is born with the orientation. it becomes much like hair color or eye color. It is just a characteristic given by God and God doesn’t give us something that would be wrong. Everyone is out to change something that is in no need of change.As I said in the question, I’m just trying to determine if these similar majority features of gay men are related to a fixed genetic condition (biological) or whether they are just predispositions to same-sex attractions (but not fixed in stone biologically). Jim, you come across so very defensive in all your posts. However, from your responses, It does appear as though you are remaining chaste and that is a good thing. You try so hard to prove that homosexuality is a normal purely biologically determined condition…why does that matter so much to you if you also know (quite rightly) that having sexual relations with someone of the same sex is morally wrong? Be proud that you’ve been given the grace from God to resist actively pursuing this lifestyle and continue to witness that truth to others. God bless.
Give some biblical proof. You can’t give me any, because there is no biblical proof that homosexuality is acceptable to God. I am not trying to be a ****, but you are fighting a lost causeHomosexual relations are wrong not homosexuality.
Fine, ignore the MagesteriumIt could also be understood to mean those who are psychologically incapable of heterosexual relations. As there is nothing wron with the homosexual orientation I ma free to believe God made me this way. Will everyone stop pretneding that the orientation is wrong in itself. You won’t convince me it is.
It does harm someone. It harms God.Because there are those in these forums whoa re trying to insinuate that even being homosexual is wrong. It’s a neutral thing that harms absolutely noone. There can be nothing wrong with it when one is born with the orientation. it becomes much like hair color or eye color. It is just a characteristic given by God and God doesn’t give us something that would be wrong. Everyone is out to change something that is in no need of change.
Who I find attractive does noone any harm. It can’t be changed and doesn’t need to be. You are the one going against the magisterium. They have said repeatedly that there is no sin in the orientation.It does harm someone. It harms God.
No you are fighting the lost cause. The Church says that the orientation alone is not sinful, just the actions are. You are going to an extreme that even they don’t reach. If one remains chaste and homosexual they are doing nothing wrong.Give some biblical proof. You can’t give me any, because there is no biblical proof that homosexuality is acceptable to God. I am not trying to be a ****, but you are fighting a lost cause
Why do I need to forgive anyone? I’m not angry. We are having a debate. If you can show me in the Bible where God specifically says that He created homosexuality, please show me. It’s a travesity that people take the original meaning of scripture and twist it around for their own justification which is definitely not the way it was intended.Middle English eunuk, from Latin eunūchus, from Greek eunoukhos : eunē, bed + -okhos, keeping (from ekhein, to keep; see segh- in Indo-European roots).]
eu’nuch·ism n. It is akin to such words as: hectic; cachexia, cathexis, entelechy, Ophiuchus, those deriving from the same indo-european root.
“Word History: The word eunuch does not derive, as one might think, from the operation that produced a eunuch but rather from one of his functions. (emphasis mine) Eunuch goes back to the Greek word eunoukhos, “a castrated person employed to take charge of the women of a harem and act as chamberlain.” The Greek word is derived from eunē, “bed,” and ekhein, “to keep.” A eunuch, of course, was ideally suited to guard the bedchamber of women.”
Also:
“literally bed-keeper or chamberlain, and not necessarily in all cases one who was mutilated, although the practice of employing such mutilated persons in Oriental courts was common (2 Kings 9:32; Esther 2:3). The law of Moses excluded them from the congregation (Deut. 23:1). They were common also among the Greeks and Romans. It is said that even to-day there are some in Rome who are employed in singing soprano in the Sistine Chapel. Three classes of eunuchs are mentioned in Matt. 19:12.”
(Both from Dictionary.com, and from dictionary of indo-european roots)
Anyway, what I’m trying to say here is that we really are ignorant of much of the translation of words, never mind the actual intent of ideas in the Bibile and ancient literature in general. Perhaps it might be useful to utilize the “77” in your handle, ladibri, and x it by 7 as recommended, to the number of time we ought to forgive. Use, perhaps, a large dose of that on yourself, and stop hiding behind scriptures by not using your own noodle to figure things out rather than piety and Bryantism.
Wonderful passages in the Bible that inspire Godly conduct:
Genesis 19: 30-36
Genesis 35:22
Exodus 6:22
(there are 15 other cases of incest in the Bible, of eight varieties)
2 Samuel 15:16, 16:21-23
2 Samuel 13:2, 14-18
Judges 19:16-26
Joshua 10:40
These are all wondrful God inspired acts put forth by the OT as a guidebook for accepted heterosexual behavior and genocide. Please keep us posted as to more of your insights on eunuchs, and perhaps we can accomodate you with more references such as the above.
BTW, I am not a homosexual. I am just fed up with ignorant christianist, muslim, jewish, whatever, bigots who propound a piously false or incomplete knowledge of scripture, its intent, or wish an interpretation based on human prejudice.
Who I find attractive does noone any harm. It can’t be changed and doesn’t need to be. You are the one going against the magisterium. They have said repeatedly that there is no sin in the orientation.
Show me some proof that I am the one ignoring the magesterium.You have yet to provide anything in Church teaching with any kind of document to prove me wrong. If you are going say that I am wrong, give me the proof. I already gave you proof where you are wrong.No you are fighting the lost cause. The Church says that the orientation alone is not sinful, just the actions are. You are going to an extreme that even they don’t reach. If one remains chaste and homosexual they are doing nothing wrong.
exactly. No one in this thread has posted a biblical reference to where anything homosexual is acceptable to God. Yet they still claim that we are wrong when we have given proof that homosexuality is wrong.Why do I need to forgive anyone? I’m not angry. We are having a debate. If you can show me in the Bible where God specifically says that He created homosexuality, please show me. It’s a travesity that people take the original meaning of scripture and twist it around for their own justification which is definitely not the way it was intended.
explain yourself please???Methinks, tobinatorstark, thou dost protest way too much. And uselessly, I might add. Where is your experiential evaluation beyond hiding behind the skirts of dubious scriptures? It must be a very easy moral life, abdicating your own gifts of intellect and affection to ages old scribbles on parchment as dry as your compassion.
Goofyjim, my point was that your argument with that scripture does not make sense because homosexuals do marry, they may regret it afterward, but they do marry.Yes, there are eunichs, but nowhere here does God say He created homosexuals, read the text again, it does not say that. Because you choose not to marry, that is your business. There are PLENTY of homosexuals who have married the opposite sex and have had children. So, that has no basis in this argument.
For a homosexual not to marry because they do not have heterosexual feelings, that is there choice. For a heterosexual not to choose to marry, that is their choice. This passage does not say anything about homosexuality, as some gays actually marry. And some former gays actually have developed heterosexual feelings either on their own or through the power of Jesus because they were unhappy with their homosexual feelings. There are plenty of women who were gay when they were young and are not now for whatever reason. But let’s not put God in a box and say He can’t work miracles or people cannot develop heterosexual feelings on their own. That’s just not true.
You mock God when you think that certain things are not possible with Him and go against scripture that says “All things are possible with God”! Let’s not twist the above scripture around to suit our needs.
Peace,
Ladybri
The Catechism states that many find themselves with the orientation through no fault of their own. They don’t pretend to know what causes it. If you don’t know the cause of something, and it is not deliberately chosen, which it isn’t, you cannot claim that it is sinful and therefore against God. Homosexual relations are the abomination not the orientation.Show me some proof that I am the one ignoring the magesterium.You have yet to provide anything in Church teaching with any kind of document to prove me wrong. If you are going say that I am wrong, give me the proof. I already gave you proof where you are wrong.
And if you can find proof that it is a Christian requirement to change the way one feels, please do so. I say again, it was biological with me and that is proof that God created it just like he creates some with other characteristics that may not be considered perfect. It may not be the ideal but it is permitted by God nonetheless. It is not a sickness to be homosexual in orientation. I don’t criticize those who change but I do criticize those who expect everyone to be heterosexual only when it is not necessary for salvation.Goofyjim, my point was that your argument with that scripture does not make sense because homosexuals do marry, they may regret it afterward, but they do marry.
That’s fine if you want to believe you were born homosexual, no one can change your mind, but please try to consider that others have changed and are changing through the power of God because they don’t wish to be that way. If you can find a literal translation where God created homosexuality, then please present it to me. Thanks.
Jim, what I’m trying to say is that your homosexual orientation is fine if you don’t act on it. My debate with you has always been that I didn’t think people are born that way. It is not an attack on you, it’s just my belief. I’ve told you numerous times how people have been healed, but you don’t seem to acknowledge this. That’s fine. Like the other guy said, if you believe you were born with it, then I guess it doesn’t matter what other people think.Who I find attractive does noone any harm. It can’t be changed and doesn’t need to be. You are the one going against the magisterium. They have said repeatedly that there is no sin in the orientation.