Is it really "natural"...To stop masturbating?

[Shlomey]

I realize this. But you said that animals act on instinct. And, if animals only act on instinct, and they have homosexual intercourse, then obviously that is an instinct, right? And if it is an instinct in animals, and humans do it too, why do you not think that it is an instinct in some humans as well?

One can address this argument by saying that animals have sexual drives: once the urge for sex is there, they will seek to satisfy it without first thinking about the “morality” of their actions. For this reasn, we can find animals humping humans’ legs.

Does that therefore mean that beastiality is okay? I reckon the Lord also never spoke explicitly about this issue in the Bible.

With regards to homosexuality: Jesus need not condemn it explicitly as he already affirmed marriage as being a holy institution between male and female. Furthermore, He was well aware of the sin of Sodom.

 

[chessmane4e5]

I realize this. But you said that animals act on instinct. And, if animals only act on instinct, and they have homosexual intercourse, then obviously that is an instinct, right? And if it is an instinct in animals, and humans do it too, why do you not think that it is an instinct in some humans as well?

youtube.com/watch?v=wqCQO_cRypg&feature=PlayList&p=B9CDA2C1BCE8CFF9&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=37

Watch from 1:29-1:34 Cane toad trying to have sex with a shoe and a human hand
Scientist says they also have tried with hunks of mud

2:50-3:45 Cane toad trying to have sex with a dead female.

These are also “instincts” as you say. So should humans follow suit?

The instinct of an animal is to procreate. As observers we can not fully understand why animals do what they do. We can only infer. To say that animals are homosexual is a claim, a theory. Observing behavior is not proof of this.

 

[prettylarge]

youtube.com/watch?v=wqCQO_cRypg&feature=PlayList&p=B9CDA2C1BCE8CFF9&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=37

Watch from 1:29-1:34 Cane toad trying to have sex with a shoe and a human hand
Scientist says they also have tried with hunks of mud

2:50-3:45 Cane toad trying to have sex with a dead female.

These are also “instincts” as you say. So should humans follow suit?

The instinct of an animal is to procreate. As observers we can not fully understand why animals do what they do. We can only infer. To say that animals are homosexual is a claim, a theory. Observing behavior is not proof of this.

The intelligence of a cane toad and a rhesus monkey are quite different.

 

[chessmane4e5]

The intelligence of a cane toad and a rhesus monkey are quite different.

I thought we were talking about instinct not intelligence?

The intelligence of (most) humans and a rhesus monkey are quite different.

 

[Shlomey]

The intelligence of a cane toad and a rhesus monkey are quite different.

Instinct is instinct, no?

 

[prettylarge]

I thought we were talking about instinct not intelligence?

The intelligence of (most) humans and a rhesus monkey are quite different.

I know we were talking about instinct, but there is a big difference between a frog humping a shoe because he doesn’t even know what is going on and a rhesus monkey having homosexual intercourse. The rhesus monkey doesn’t try to have sex with shoes thinking they are another monkey.

 

[prettylarge]

Instinct is instinct, no?

What I was trying to say is that the frog just thinks that the shoe or mud is another frog. It has absolutely no idea what is going on. The monkey understands that it is having sex with another monkey of the same sex.

 

[chessmane4e5]

What I was trying to say is that the frog just thinks that the shoe or mud is another frog. It has absolutely no idea what is going on. The monkey understands that it is having sex with another monkey of the same sex.

Really, you know what the monkey understands? Amazing.

I have already stated that we CAN NOT know the mind of the animal, therefore we can not call it homosexual. Also, have the scientists watched these monkeys to see if they only do this with other males, or do they sometimes have sex with females?

 

[chessmane4e5]

What I was trying to say is that the frog just thinks that the shoe or mud is another frog. It has absolutely no idea what is going on. The monkey understands that it is having sex with another monkey of the same sex.

Actually then, can you tell me WHY the monkey is doing what it is doing?

Is it just enjoying the feeling it is getting?

Does it have a bond with the other male monkey and they are expressing that bond?

Is the monkey simply overtaken by it sexual urge to procreate that it can not stop itself?

 

[chessmane4e5]

I disagree with your interpretation of “God is their belly.” I was told by my professor, who has written at least 5 books on Paul and is a leading scholar on his letters, that the people Paul was referring to when he said “God is their belly” were gluttons.

Who was your Professor? Was he a Catholic?

I just read Philippians. It is verse 3:19 “Their end is destruction; their god is their stomach; their glory is in their shame.”

Gluttony does not seems the focus of the letter to me.

The source material I have says it was written to thank the church for their material help,. The church had sent Epaphroditus to assist Paul while in prison, and they had repeatedly sent money for Paul’s needs. Additionally, Paul was concerned for Christian unity. Perhaps he anticipated and feared a potential break in fellowship (4:2-3), knowing the damage such a break could bring (1:12-19).

If you read what comes before and after the passage you cite (which is always important to do) Paul is telling them how to “pursue … the prize promised by God’s heavenly call in Christ Jesus.” 3:14

And immediately after 3:19 we get “They are focused on earthly things, but our citizenship is in heaven, from which we also eagerly wait for a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ.”

No where else in the letter do I see him talk about food.

I must admit my original answer was “off the cuff” and in fact totally wrong, it was Peter that taught what Jesus meant when He said, “It is not what goes into the mouth that defiles a man, but what comes out.”

 

[prettylarge]

Who was your Professor? Was he a Catholic?

I just read Philippians. It is verse 3:19 “Their end is destruction; their god is their stomach; their glory is in their shame.”

Gluttony does not seems the focus of the letter to me.

The source material I have says it was written to thank the church for their material help,. The church had sent Epaphroditus to assist Paul while in prison, and they had repeatedly sent money for Paul’s needs. Additionally, Paul was concerned for Christian unity. Perhaps he anticipated and feared a potential break in fellowship (4:2-3), knowing the damage such a break could bring (1:12-19).

If you read what comes before and after the passage you cite (which is always important to do) Paul is telling them how to “pursue … the prize promised by God’s heavenly call in Christ Jesus.” 3:14

And immediately after 3:19 we get “They are focused on earthly things, but our citizenship is in heaven, from which we also eagerly wait for a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ.”

No where else in the letter do I see him talk about food.

I must admit my original answer was “off the cuff” and in fact totally wrong, it was Peter that taught what Jesus meant when He said, “It is not what goes into the mouth that defiles a man, but what comes out.”

In the closing chapters of Romans Paul says that you should not judge those who follow dietary laws. He calls them “weak” but he says that the strong believers are not above them. And if it offends them if you eat “unclean” foods in front of them, then you shouldn’t eat them. Does this sound like something that Paul would write while also condemning these people in another letter. No, of course not. Read the later chapters of Romans if you don’t believe me. I could look up where if you are interested.

EDIT: look, this is the passage I was talking about:

Phillipians 3:19 - Their destiny is destruction, their god is their stomach, and their glory is in their shame. Their mind is on earthly things.

Basically Paul is condemning those who over eat or focus on physical pleasures. This applies to lust as well I would imagine. You shouldn’t only be after phyisical pleasures, but you should strive for spiritual pleasures. That is what Paul means. And when Paul condemns homosexuality, I believe that he is saying the same thing. Many homosexuals of the day were only after lust and pleasure, and this seems to be what he is condemning. I don’t think that he is condemning a loving, monogamous relationship between two males or two females.

 

[chessmane4e5]

In the closing chapters of Romans Paul says that you should not judge those who follow dietary laws. He calls them “weak” but he says that the strong believers are not above them. And if it offends them if you eat “unclean” foods in front of them, then you shouldn’t eat them. Does this sound like something that Paul would write while also condemning these people in another letter. No, of course not. Read the later chapters of Romans if you don’t believe me. I could look up where if you are interested.

EDIT: look, this is the passage I was talking about:

Phillipians 3:19 - Their destiny is destruction, their god is their stomach, and their glory is in their shame. Their mind is on earthly things.

Basically Paul is condemning those who over eat or focus on physical pleasures. This applies to lust as well I would imagine. You shouldn’t only be after phyisical pleasures, but you should strive for spiritual pleasures. That is what Paul means. And when Paul condemns homosexuality, I believe that he is saying the same thing. Many homosexuals of the day were only after lust and pleasure, and this seems to be what he is condemning. I don’t think that he is condemning a loving, monogamous relationship between two males or two females.

First off, the letter to the Romans is obviously going to be focused on different issues then the letter to the Philippians. Both groups were struggling with different issues, so why would Paul focus on something not related to them. I.e. if the Romans really understood the nature of the divinity of Christ, Paul is not going to spend a lot of time on it.

As for the Phillipians, yes I also quoted that one passage 3:19, but I can not see how you can definitively say Paul was talking about gluttony. I will do some more research into this, but regardless, it is one passage, where as you earlier claimed that the entire letter was devoted to the topic of gluttony. One line is kind of weak, not to say it is not important, but clearly it is not the focus of his letter.

 

[prettylarge]

First off, the letter to the Romans is obviously going to be focused on different issues then the letter to the Philippians. Both groups were struggling with different issues, so why would Paul focus on something not related to them. I.e. if the Romans really understood the nature of the divinity of Christ, Paul is not going to spend a lot of time on it.

As for the Phillipians, yes I also quoted that one passage 3:19, but I can not see how you can definitively say Paul was talking about gluttony. I will do some more research into this, but regardless, it is one passage, where as you earlier claimed that the entire letter was devoted to the topic of gluttony. One line is kind of weak, not to say it is not important, but clearly it is not the focus of his letter.

You are right, it is not the focus of the whole letter. But, in my opinion, it is brought up by Paul as much as homosexuality is. Which is the point I was trying to make anyway. Basically 3:19 isn’t just about gluttony either. It is about people focusing on physical pleasures, which is one of Paul’s major messages. And I think that homosexuality falls into this category for Paul, because the gay men back then were just after pleasure…not monogamous, loving relationships.

 

[chessmane4e5]

The only thing I can find by Paul on homosexuality is 1 Cor 6:9 and Rom 1:26-27

Then Paul has a lot to say in verses 1 Cor 6:12-20
My commentary says, "While it was customary for Corinthian men to have sex with prostitutes at local temples, Paul argued that this should not be the practice of the followers of Christ. Paul mentioned same-sex eroticism among the vices that bar the practitioners from the kingdom of God (verses 9-11). The Greek words malakos (“soft [one]”) and arsenokoites (“one who has coitus with a man”) make clear that Paul was not talking about sexual inclination or orientation, but sodomy - the act of sexual penetration between men. Elsewhere Paul cited the homosexual/lesbian way of life as symptomatic of humanity’s rejection of God and His design at creation (Rm 1:24-27). Unholy sexual practice easily becomes entrenched behavior; disengaging from it is difficult. Nonetheless, in Paul’s words “Some of you were like this” (italics mine), we see that such disengagement is both possible and necessary.

More to come

 

[chessmane4e5]

You are right, it is not the focus of the whole letter. But, in my opinion, it is brought up by Paul as much as homosexuality is. Which is the point I was trying to make anyway. Basically 3:19 isn’t just about gluttony either. It is about people focusing on physical pleasures, which is one of Paul’s major messages. And I think that homosexuality falls into this category for Paul, because the gay men back then were just after pleasure…not monogamous, loving relationships.

See what I just wrote up above, but I think it is clear that Paul admonishes homosexuality more than “sins of the stomach”.

Especially in Rom 1:26-32.

2 references to homosexuality. 1 for gluttony.

 

[Monica4316]

YES it’s natural to stop and no not everyone does it!!

pray to our Blessed Mother…

many people HAVE overcome it and it’s possible.

Dont let anyone tell you it’s impossible or that “it’s alright”.

Quoted from another thread…
God made sex for two people to express self giving love and to bring new life into the world.
One person seeking self gratification goes against that…
and that’s what makes it sinful.
it’s not worth it at all, trust me.

 

[Pfeffer102]

HIJACK, HIJACK! THREAD HIJACK, BAN THESE HEATHENS!!!

No, I’m just kidding. It’s alright. I just can’t believe how many posts this thing got! Of course, it wasn’t really on my topic at all…It just sort of turned into some “Jesus didn’t say THIS in the Bible!” debate. Okay. I’ll clear this up for all of you who just don’t seem to get it.

I am gay. I have been gay ever since whenever. And, whoever said that there has been scientific proof that there is no gay gene, let me see it. Oh, there is none? That’s what I thought. The animals? Bad example, because as someone said, we don’t know *why *they do it…just that they do it. So that’s not a very good point.

What is a good point is this. I realized that I liked guys around the saaaame time every other guy knew they liked girls. Since forever. I knew I was different. 7th grade I knew for sure. When I was like, 8, 9, whatever the age it doesn’t matter, let’s just say very young, I used to Google pictures of shirtless guys. This was 2nd grade, people! Do I know why I did it? Heck no! But I did. And I sure didn’t know how to “choose” a sexual orientation at this very young age! It just happens.

So please. Stop saying being gay is a choice. I don’t know if it was since birth. But it would make sense. The way you choose to live your life is a choice…The sexual attraction is not.

God created everything. Everything in this world. Correct?
So He must have created homosexuality.

Anyway.
Day 18 without the m thing. Uh…It wasn’t too bad today I guess. I’m getting e things in class a lot more often, for some…uh…reason. Wonder why. But I definitely think I’ll make my 21 days. And then my next goal: Christmas! And then: Forever! I didn’t know how long this will last, but I’m fighting for everyone with this.

Thank you to all of you who are praying for me. It’s working…I can feel it.

 

[chessmane4e5]

Sorry to have participated in the hijacking

Awesome job on not giving in to sin, it looks like your goal is 21 days, but I know you can make it for 30 (and then 60, 90…a whole year!!)

I remember my brother used to admire (I think this word fits) shirtless males. But I think he wanted to be like them. There are guys that are narcissistic and so they look at other guys a lot (although probably with jealousy). The really question is, are people born like this, already pre-programed to have these traits, or was it their life experiences that developed them into who they are? The easy answer is that it is both, but unfortunately I do not think we will ever have the complete answer.

As for the gay gene did you read this
trueorigin.org/gaygene01.asp

I guess I would say there is no evidence right now either way. Until we know what causes homosexuality, it is difficult to say their is no gay gene (kind of like if I showed you a hay stack and said “Prove to me a needle is not in there” and you didn’t know it but there really was no needle in there

God created everything. Everything in this world. Correct?
So He must have created homosexuality.

This is an interesting point. Would it be right to say that God created sin? I don’t think so. Sin is essentially rebellion against God. God gave us free will. With that Adam made a choice which led to him knowing Good and Evil.

I do not think it makes sense to say that God created homosexuality or any sin for that matter. This one has me thinking

 

[Pfeffer102]

Sorry to have participated in the hijacking

No big deal, apology accepted.

Awesome job on not giving in to sin, it looks like your goal is 21 days, but I know you can make it for 30 (and then 60, 90…a whole year!!)

=) Thanks! Let’s just hope I can go that long.

As for the gay gene did you read this
trueorigin.org/gaygene01.asp

Hm, no, I actually didn’t. But thanks for the link. I only skimmed it, because I’m an extremely slow reader and that would probably take me hours to go through, but the points I got were pretty much what you said: There’s not really much evidence on it either way. Someone finds that there is, another proves them wrong…All kinda goes back to square one.

Would it be right to say that God created sin? I don’t think so.

Touche! I just don’t know though! I told you the facts, and everything I said was true…But what I don’t know is exactly when it started or why I’m like this. Gosh, the mysteries of life.

 

[chessmane4e5]

What I think is really unfortunate is the way society has portrayed (and probably created) that a man and a woman are allowed to do anything in the bedroom, and it is so pleasurable, so everyone should be having sex all the time. I mean, if your 60, get Viagra (or what ever they have out now). It is really too bad, because sex is not everything. (It is something, I am not trying to down play it).

What also seems to get brushed aside is that heterosexuals face their own set of sins. We can still Lust (even married people can lust for their spouse which is a sin). Some are addicted to Porn and Masturbation. But our society (with movies like American Pie) portray all these activities as normal. So I can not imagine what it feels like to be attracted to people that are basically “off-limits”. And then having to deal with society flaunting it everywhere.

I know I have to deal with watching tv or a movie, and half-naked (or full) woman are shown having sex or dancing erotically. I do not want to see that in an action movie or even in a love story. For once, I just want some good, clean fun, without being tempted.

I will continue to pray for you though.