Is Homosexuality Genetic?

[yngve]

Times change-the point AGAIN is that was sin then is still sin now.

Doesn this imply that what was alright then is alright now? Eating shrimp is an abomination now as it was then?

So you agree that what was considered a sin hasnt changed, just the punshment. Well we are getting somewhere.

No, not really. See above. I just say that what was considered moral then is considered imoral today.

No-I am stateing that your premise that things that were considered sins in the old testament are no longer considered sins now. You have yet to prove that.

Have you read the 5 books of Law in their entirety?

So is the idea now that you derail the thread as i scramble to defend myself against this ridicolous assertion? sorry, i wont play along.

I am sorry that you find the assertion that killing disobetient children nowadays is imoral even though it was more than moral in Biblical times proving that morals have changed is ridicolous. Maybe burning witches, burning Joan of Arc, the Inquisition, rewarding ‘donations’ with indulgences etc are aslo justifiable. [And note that here I’m not attacking the Church but some its members which are guilty of these crimes]

We are not talking about modesty-we are talking about you making assertions based on premises that are not true.

Yes we are. You cannot claim that what you say is an absolute truth. Only God is the Truth.

You premise is false-we can draw no conclusions from a false premise

Rethink please.

 

[Bennie_P]

I thank you, I’m in a gloomy mood as of late. I lost two friends to suicide in the past month, both were still stuck in the mode of trying to ‘cure’ themselves. So I’m pretty sure it had something to do with their deaths too.

As far as I am concerned, NARTH peddles insanity at its best, death at its worst.

Can you post their obits so we can pray for them?

The person responsible for a suicide is the person committing the suicide, for it is that person’s choice. Even then it may questionable.

I challenge you to prove what you are saying for it seems to me you have claimed a least a dozen freinds lost to suicide in the last year, either that you are serial killer?

In this thread you have claimed at least three or more. Now two friends to NARTH, “many” freinds to the stopping of sex-change operations at John Hopkins, probably.

If you are in mental anguish over your particular situation seek professional help.

 

[PerryJ]

I certainly hope that you are not inferring that the orientation alone is somehow evil. It is not. If it was it would require every effort to change it. Of course that is not the case.

I am asking if you believe God created people with a dispostion to test them. If you state yes then God has created man to be tested, as he is all knowing, he knows some will fail and will go to Hell. In essence God created some men with the intent that they go to Hell.

If you answer no then the result is something else caused the disposition. A disposition to refute God’s natural order. Some would state that it is original sin. If original sin created the disposition then one can make the statement that the disposition was created by the original evil act. If this is how it was created then would not one have to try and refute the disposition? Not just homosexuality. Any sin one would have to try and change the disposition?

 

[PerryJ]

Those things are TOTALLY different than homosexuality. With rape, child abuse and typically alcoholism, people are hurt and lives are changed forever, usually in a negative way. With a gay relationship (i mean a faithful, monogamous, non-“gay scene” relationship) who is hurt?

The world is hurt. There is no sin that does not impact the world. Sin creates pain and death. Man was not designed to die. Original sin created death. It also created pain as we can see with child birth. As a Catholic one has to confess to a Preist because that sin impacts man. As such Christ forgives us; but, man is part of the process as we hurt our fellow man.

One should also note it hurts God. To refute how God created his universe is an affront to him. This does not just pertain to homosexuality. It is all affronts to God.

It appears that when people discuss homosexual activities they attempt to segregate it from other sins. Sin is a rejection of God and hurt God’s creation.

 

[ladybri77]

Whiel scripture prohibits homosexual acts it is totally silent on the orientation. I think God is fine with the orientation.

If you have accepted Christ, you are New in Him. “I have come to make all things NEW”, He says. We no longer have to identify with our old sin nature of which homosexuality is a part of…

Again, if you read in Roman’s, the one that says “…homosexuals, effeminate,” etc, will not inherit the kingdom of God, but that is what you WERE… so you will go to heaven if you have accepted Him in your heart. The Holy Spirit will reveal this truth to you if you invite Him to live in your spirit. I pray that the Holy Spirit’s power will work in you.

This is not to say not to accept yourself with the feelings you have, this is to say that if we saw ourselves as God sees us, it is as a “New creation”. If you read these scriptures I’m speaking of and ask the Lord to reveal His truth to you, I’m sure He will when you’re ready. I’m not talking about man-made reparative therapy. I’m talking about the transforming, redemptive power of Our Lord Jesus Christ!

Lord, please help us to see ourselves as You see us, through Your eyes as precious, loved and special. Help us to see our new identity which You gave us through Your death and resurrection on the Cross. Thank you, Jesus! In the name of Jesus.

 

[PerryJ]

So you are saying that it is relative whether it is imoral to kill your disobediat child and the morality is determined by the historical point you are refering to? I thought you were militating against moral relativism.

The law has not changed? In Moses time both parents were to take their childen before the Church officials. The Church officials would decide their fate. Just as now parents can take their children to the police and the courts for punishment.

As we live in a society with rules, and the Bible also dicated that we follow the rules of our society unless they are evil, we would follow the courts decision.

One has to read the entire context of Deuteronomy. The preceding verses state that the parents are not to injure the children. The next verse show how the children are not to injure the parents. Pulling verses out of context to make a case is wrong. One has to read the entire Bible.

 

[estesbob]

Sure, so the children killed in the past don’t count. It must be rather cruel as you say and this isn’t the God of love I know. So in your opinion, God ordered parents to kill their disobedient children and with the comming of Jesus told them that that wasn’t necessary?

ell?

Please show me in Scripture where it calls for parents to kill their chldren if they diosobey them.?

Now lets get back to the sinfullness of homosexual behavior(rather than to continue to try and fight off the army of strawmen you have unleashed) which is condemend by :

Scripture
Tradition
The writings of the church fathers
The teachings of every Christian religion for the better part of the last 2,000 years.

 

[estesbob]

Doesn this imply that what was alright then is alright now? Eating shrimp is an abomination now as it was then?

The Jewish dietary laws were specifcally negated in the New Testament. The sinfullness of homosexual behavior was affirmed

No, not really. See above. I just say that what was considered moral then is considered imoral today.

As usual a false premise arrived at by grabbing a random verse or to two our of scripture and ignoring the rest.

Have you read the 5 books of Law in their entirety?

Yes.

I am sorry that you find the assertion that killing disobetient children nowadays is imoral even though it was more than moral in Biblical times proving that morals have changed is ridicolous. Maybe burning witches, burning Joan of Arc, the Inquisition, rewarding ‘donations’ with indulgences etc are aslo justifiable. [And note that here I’m not attacking the Church but some its members which are guilty of these crimes]

It is getting increasingly tedious fighting ff the army of strawmen you have unleashed. Nothing above has the slightest thing the sinfullness of homosexual behaior.

Yes we are. You cannot claim that what you say is an absolute truth. Only God is the Truth.

And God, through his Son, entrusted the Truth to the Catholic Church You would have us create our own versions of the truth based on our own desires

Rethink please.

 

[ladybri77]

The law has not changed? In Moses time both parents were to take their childen before the Church officials. The Church officials would decide their fate. Just as now parents can take their children to the police and the courts for punishment.

As we live in a society with rules, and the Bible also dicated that we follow the rules of our society unless they are evil, we would follow the courts decision.

One has to read the entire context of Deuteronomy. The preceding verses state that the parents are not to injure the children. The next verse show how the children are not to injure the parents. Pulling verses out of context to make a case is wrong. One has to read the entire Bible.

This was part of the devotion for today on Heartlight.org. Thought I would share it with you:

“For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has
any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself
through love.” Galatians 5:6

Prayer:
Dear Lord, please help us tear down every wall that divides and
separates your people. Forgive us for our pettiness and prejudice
toward each other. Stir in us a deep longing to share the unity of
heaven in our world today. In the name of Jesus, the atoning
sacrifice for all the peoples of the world, I ask this. Amen.

 

[PerryJ]

This was part of the devotion for today on Heartlight.org. Thought I would share it with you:

“For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has
any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself
through love.” Galatians 5:6

Prayer:
Dear Lord, please help us tear down every wall that divides and
separates your people. Forgive us for our pettiness and prejudice
toward each other. Stir in us a deep longing to share the unity of
heaven in our world today. In the name of Jesus, the atoning
sacrifice for all the peoples of the world, I ask this. Amen.

One can not take one verse to try and prove a point. One has to take the entire Bible into account. As a former Protestant this misuse of the Bible is very damaging and leads people astray.

The Old Testament shows that sin has consequences. The New Testament shows that Christ died for our sins. This does not mean that the New Testament overrides the Old Testament. God is timeless; therefore, he does not change. His creation is the same in the Old Testament and the New Testament.

People often try to ignore the Old Testament in order to profess a world love; which allows moral relativism. The Bible does profess mercy. It also professes justice. God is loving and just. One does not supersede the other. Sin has consequences and the universal man pays for his sins.

 

[estesbob]

This was part of the devotion for today on Heartlight.org. Thought I would share it with you:

“For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has
any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself
through love.” Galatians 5:6

Prayer:
Dear Lord, please help us tear down every wall that divides and
separates your people. Forgive us for our pettiness and prejudice
toward each other. Stir in us a deep longing to share the unity of
heaven in our world today. In the name of Jesus, the atoning
sacrifice for all the peoples of the world, I ask this. Amen.

The problem with heartlight.org is that it is an evangelical Christian website that adheres to once saved always saved and salvation by faith alone.

Just prior to these verse you mention Paul makes it clear that " love" is not enough:

19The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.

And for those who say criticizing sin is wrong Paul has this to say:

Brothers, if someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual should restore him gently.

 

[ladybri77]

One can not take one verse to try and prove a point. One has to take the entire Bible into account. As a former Protestant this misuse of the Bible is very damaging and leads people astray.

The Old Testament shows that sin has consequences. The New Testament shows that Christ died for our sins. This does not mean that the New Testament overrides the Old Testament. God is timeless; therefore, he does not change. His creation is the same in the Old Testament and the New Testament.

People often try to ignore the Old Testament in order to profess a world love; which allows moral relativism. The Bible does profess mercy. It also professes justice. God is loving and just. One does not supersede the other. Sin has consequences and the universal man pays for his sins.

So, you’re saying that if God says, “Love your brother with your whole heart and your neighbor as yourself”, this being the greatest commandment, we cannot believe this unless we read the whole bible? Come on, give me a break. The verses mean what they say and say what they mean. Let’s not try to justify sin…

 

[yngve]

The Jewish dietary laws were specifcally negated in the New Testament. The sinfullness of homosexual behavior was affirmed

This is not the issue here. The fact that the laws were ‘negated’ (although this is not de best word) proves that an issue which was regarded moral in Moses’ time is regarded imoral in the new Christian time. And again the issue is killing disobedient children, not sinning against parents.

As usual a false premise arrived at by grabbing a random verse or to two our of scripture and ignoring the rest.

This is such a cliche. And no, I didn’t take the verse randomly and yes I’ve read both the the context, the book and the history of the hebrew people.

Yes, God entruested the truth to the Church just as he entrusted it to the author of the book of leviticus. As a result, may laws given then are seen not only imoral but outrageous today. This may be the case for the Church as wel, as it already was. The Church thought it had the right in condemning heretics to death, considering it moral. Now, I hope you agree, we all see it imoral.

 

[PerryJ]

So, you’re saying that if God says, “Love your brother with your whole heart and your neighbor as yourself”, this being the greatest commandment, we cannot believe this unless we read the whole bible? Come on, give me a break. The verses mean what they say and say what they mean. Let’s not try to justify sin…

Do you believe Love means to condone sin? I am not sure I am following your thought process. One is to love the sinner; but, not the sin. One is to judge the actions of his brother; but, not to condemn him. If a person sins, as a loving brother one has to point out the errors of his way and guide him back to righteousness.

You don’t mean that love negates ones responsibility to not sin do you?

 

[estesbob]

This is not the issue here. The fact that the laws were ‘negated’ (although this is not de best word) proves that an issue which was regarded moral in Moses’ time is regarded imoral in the new Christian time. And again the issue is killing disobedient children, not sinning against parents.

The problem is that the dietary laws are specifically negated in the New Testament and the laws against homosexual behavior gare specifically affirmed. The dietary laws were negated only because they applied to Jews and were never intended to apply to Christians. Your strawman about klling children have already been effectively demolished by TerryJ.

This is such a cliche. And no, I didn’t take the verse randomly and yes I’ve read both the the context, the book and the history of the hebrew people.

You obviously have selectively taken the context since your premises are incorrect. It does not follow that because they were harsher punishments in the Old Testament for some sins and some people got burned at the stake in the Middle Ages that we can negate the teachings of the church when they disagree with the way we want to live our lives

Yes, God entruested the truth to the Church just as he entrusted it to the author of the book of leviticus. As a result, may laws given then are seen not only imoral but outrageous today. This may be the case for the Church as wel, as it already was. The Church thought it had the right in condemning heretics to death, considering it moral. Now, I hope you agree, we all see it imoral.

If God entrusted the truth of the Church and the Church has consistently taught for 2000 years that homosexual behavior is sinful you have no case. Again you are hung up on punishments-heresy is still a mortal sin, on the punishments change.

 

[ladybri77]

Do you believe Love means to condone sin? I am not sure I am following your thought process. One is to love the sinner; but, not the sin. One is to judge the actions of his brother; but, not to condemn him. If a person sins, as a loving brother one has to point out the errors of his way and guide him back to righteousness.

You don’t mean that love negates ones responsibility to not sin do you?

I’m saying that you don’t have to read the whole bible to understand the meaning of one scripture. I just used that scripture as an example. I believe the we can love the sinner and point out what he’s doing wrong at the same time, in fact that is a loving act and what God tells us to do.

 

[ladybri77]

The problem with heartlight.org is that it is an evangelical Christian website that adheres to once saved always saved and salvation by faith alone.

Catholics aren’t the only ones who have Jesus or the Truth of Him in our hearts. He’s blessed many of His Christian people with Himself and His truth.

 

[PerryJ]

I’m saying that you don’t have to read the whole bible to understand the meaning of one scripture. I just used that scripture as an example. I believe the we can love the sinner and point out what he’s doing wrong at the same time, in fact that is a loving act and what God tells us to do.

What I am saying is you are pulling out one verse and trying to apply it to a situation without applying the whole Bible. One can not do this as it is wrong. One can pull verses out and support any sin. I have shown your original verse below.

“For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has
any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself
through love.” Galatians 5:6"

 

[yngve]

The problem is that the dietary laws are specifically negated in the New Testament and the laws against homosexual behavior gare specifically affirmed. The dietary laws were negated only because they applied to Jews and were never intended to apply to Christians. Your strawman about klling children have already been effectively demolished by TerryJ.

I don’t know who Terry J. is, never heard of him. Maybe you could post a link. I know lots who demolished the fact that homosexuality is a sin, so what’s your point. This isn’t a contest.

You obviously have selectively taken the context since your premises are incorrect. It does not follow that because they were harsher punishments in the Old Testament for some sins and some people got burned at the stake in the Middle Ages that we can negate the teachings of the church when they disagree with the way we want to live our lives

If God entrusted the truth of the Church and the Church has consistently taught for 2000 years that homosexual behavior is sinful you have no case. Again you are hung up on punishments-heresy is still a mortal sin, on the punishments change.

It’s not the same thing to admonest someone publically to burning him on a stake. It is imoral to burn someone, yet the Church who

consistently taught for 2000 years that homosexual behavior is sinful

did so and ask appologies for burning people (sometimes innocent people, sometimes saints) on a stake.

 

[ladybri77]

What I am saying is you are pulling out one verse and trying to apply it to a situation without applying the whole Bible. One can not do this as it is wrong. One can pull verses out and support any sin. I have shown your original verse below.

“For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has
any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself
through love.” Galatians 5:6"

Well, I use verses to “support” that the act of homosexuality is a sin, not deny it.

People can deny God’s natural laws all they want, but the Truth will live forever.