Why doesn't God heal homosexuals?

  • Thread starter Thread starter cookie-san
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It condemns sex with angels as being in violation of the law of hospitality as the city’s residents were cruel. Jude wasn’t wrong. Your interpretation is.
 
Joe1 said:
he condemns it in the old testament, also new testament, including the fact that he only created one Marriage.
Click to expand...
Yes, I have often wondered why the Incarnate God only mentions a man leaving his parents and joining his wife. Or why there is not a single solitary example in the Scriptures of a favorably presented homosexual couple. Nor even a single favorable reference.
 
Andy_82 said:
Paul the Persecutor never knew Christ and we only have his books because Emperor Constantine obliterated the writings of the others as he found Paul’s useful. He was a tyrant and Paul’s words can only be taken at face value and with a lot of historical context as a result.
Click to expand...
Saint Paul may have never known Christ personally, but clearly Christ chose him to be an Apostle. Do not disgrace an important person in the creation of the Church. He preached a lot about Christ. Yes he WAS a tyrant. But then he became a man of God. Not everyone is perfect in Jesus’s ministry. We know that for a fact.
 
You’ve lost the context in translation here. He, in the Liber Gomorrhianus, was preaching about fornication overall in monastic practice. Not the lay people as they hadn’t taken a vow of chastity. He wasn’t speaking about homosexuality alone here. He was talking about sex period. Sodomitic acts in the language of the day meant not being gay. It was another way of saying perversions. Which, breaking a vow of chastity for the sake of a straight relationship would be.
 
Last edited:
Andy_82 said:
It condemns sex with angels as being in violation of the law of hospitality as the city’s residents were cruel. Jude wasn’t wrong. Your interpretation is.
Click to expand...
The rejection of homosexual behavior that is found in the Old Testament is well known. In Genesis 19, two angels in disguise visit the city of Sodom and are offered hospitality and shelter by Lot. During the night, the men of Sodom demand that Lot hand over his guests for homosexual intercourse. Lot refuses, and the angels blind the men of Sodom. Lot and his household escape, and the town is destroyed by fire “because the outcry against its people has become great before the Lord” (Gen. 19:13).

Throughout history, Jewish and Christian scholars have recognized that one of the chief sins involved in God’s destruction of Sodom was its people’s homosexual behavior. But today, certain homosexual activists promote the idea that the sin of Sodom was merely a lack of hospitality. Although inhospitality is a sin, it is clearly the homosexual behavior of the Sodomites that is singled out for special criticism in the account of their city’s destruction. We must look to Scripture’s own interpretation of the sin of Sodom.

Jude 7 records that Sodom and Gomorrah “acted immorally and indulged in unnatural lust.” Ezekiel says that Sodom committed “abominable things” (Ezek. 16:50), which could refer to homosexual and heterosexual acts of sin. Lot even offered his two virgin daughters in place of his guests, but the men of Sodom rejected the offer, preferring homosexual sex over heterosexual sex (Gen. 19:8–9). Ezekiel does allude to a lack of hospitality in saying that Sodom “did not aid the poor and needy” (Ezek. 16:49). So homosexual acts and a lack of hospitality both contributed to the destruction of Sodom, with the former being the far greater sin, the “abominable thing” that set off God’s wrath.

(Courtesy of Catholic Answers)
 
Last edited:
stupidisasstupiddoes said:
Deliberate partial quote to ignore the fact that all ‘cures’ have failed
Click to expand...
I don’t Ignore that. I proclaim it. We have no clue how to treat this condition that you’ve said is caused slightly by genetic factors and largely by environmental factors! There certainly is no treatment that I know enough about to advocate.
 
No, they have not. When read in the original Hebrew and Greek the Bible turns into a much different manuscript and is why version of the bible such as the New Jerusalem and the NABRE offer contextual indications along with the text. Had you bothered to read your full copy and paste job there, you would note that it likely refers to homosexual and heterosexual acts. Again, you’re cherry picking here.
 
It’s not a condition. That’s why the DSM dropped its categorization of it as such in 1973.
 
I am not disgracing an important person. I am saying that this important person needs to be read properly and taking everything he says to heart means you aren’t doing so. The other Apostles regarded him as a firebrand for that very reason: Christ may have enlightened him. But, he was still a deeply flawed man.
 
Andy_82 said:
Had you bothered to read your full copy and paste job there, you would note that it likely refers to homosexual and heterosexual acts. Again, you’re cherry picking here.
Click to expand...
It refers to both you are quite correct. I’m not an idiot Andy and how am I cherry picking? You completely deny all these facts that God says that Homosexual acts are wrong and yet you don’t even have proof of God saying gay marriage is acceptable. We have the proof that God hates Homosexual acts. Jonathan and David were not Homosexual lovers, believe me I made that mistake and thankfully I was wrong
 
Andy_82 said:
It’s not a condition. That’s why the DSM dropped its categorization of it as such in 1973.
Click to expand...
Take it up with the other poster who claims to know the cause.

There are good pragmatic reasons to take it out of the DSM, chief among them being:
  • it doesn’t interfere with the affected person operating in society;
  • many don’t seek treatment;
  • there is no accepted treatment.
There are also other views about why it was dropped.

Regardless, two men desiring acts which exchange their gametes does suggest something is amiss.
 
Last edited:
Which is why you need to read the book more carefully than you are. You are walking past a mountain of information by leaving historicity on the floor.
 
Andy_82 said:
You have been given the context in which you’re supposed to read the bible and refuse to hear of it. Never mind you ignore the meaning of the book for your own pursuits in the process. We do not have any proof God hates homosexual acts at all from the bible. We have proof he hates fornication as it harms. We have proof he hates the use of our bodies for the worship of a false deity. We have no proof at all for what you say beyond some outmoded bigotry.
Click to expand...
Excuse me how about Leviticus? That law is straight forward and is clear that Homosexual acts are an abomination
 
Ah…he’s talking about same sex behavior on priests.

So I guess you want us to think that among the lay the effects don’t occur.

Ok. ahh. Nobody buys your spin.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top