Why doesn't God heal homosexuals?

[Prodigal_Son]

Again, lay off the alt right talk. It’s just annoying and you’re just causing more problems with your last line.

Alt right? I oppose nuclear weapons, support affirmative action, oppose Trump, support gun restrictions, support a path to citizenship, promote many entitlement programs, and I – like you – support the notion of civil unions. How exactly am I being “alt right”?

I suspect you just think anyone who disagrees with you is crazy.

 

[adamhovey1988]

I’m not alt right, I am closer to an anarchist. But I do understand something called natural law.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Because the prefix doesn’t match the suffix. If you’re tying to say “When a person says we should stop discriminating a group, he does not intend to endorse all that discriminated group does,” you did not need to insert a superfluous adverb in thereby. Thereby indicates a previous action. Not a potential one.

Huh? Which prefix? Which suffix? Which adverb? The only adverb in the sentence is “badly”, and it modifies “treating”.

 

[Andy_82]

I never said you were and natural law as a philosophy is given to change as it is not carved in stone. Though, the church’s take on it for some reason seems to stop at Aquinas. Somehow, before then it was open to change.

 

[Andy_82]

Thereby is an adverb.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Because, you keep using terms such as ‘liberalizing’ and go into anti-activist language. Considering your stance on this issue with that in mind it strikes as being from a hard right wing stance.

I mostly find people on CAF criticizing me as being too left-wing, so I find your comments amusing. I used the term “liberalizing” simply to point out that your approach to the Bible continually involves interpretations that favor views massively at odds with the history of Biblical scholarship. The scholars you are drawing on seem to think that all Biblical scholars were crazy until the last 75 years or so.

I read ancient Greek, and the references to homosexual activity in the New Testament are not ambiguous.

 

[theCardinalbird]

You’re not explaining why it is offensive

God deemed a man lying with a man as with a woman an abomination. His reason is most likely that it closes the creative process to create life. Your understanding of the quote opens up a whole lot of questions:
If God accepts gay sex as love then why not make a distinction? Why not say you can have gay sex as long as it’s not for temple prostitution? Why not create another Marriage (gay marriage) equal to heterosexual Marriage with procreation as that’s what the biology of the sexual faculty is used for?

We see Leviticus say the generic act of Homosexual sex, we have Jude explain unnatural lusts about Sodom and Gomorrah, we have Saint Paul who also explains Homosexual attraction then committing the act. But we never see this supposed acceptance of gay marriage as being love. You are trying to show that God accepts gay marriage but I have yet to see a quote from you that truly proves it.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Thereby is an adverb.

Do you claim that I misused it?

 

[Andy_82]

Yes, it indicates a preexisting context to the sentence that isn’t present.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

They’re contextual and pertain to pagan goddess worship. Not gay love.

Paul says that arsenokoitai will not inherit the kingdom of God. The word means “men who lie with men.” Not ambiguous. Not temple prostitution.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Yes, it indicates a preexisting context to the sentence that isn’t present.

The person who says X does not thereby imply Y. Did I just “indicate a preexisting context” that wasn’t present?

 

[adamhovey1988]

Now I’m sure this is a troll post, because that is splitting hairs. Not to mention, English isn’t standardized like, say, French.

 

[theCardinalbird]

Romans, 1:25. It sets up the context for the rest of the section on the matter

Let’s read a little more then from 1:25

1:24. Wherefore, God gave them up to the desires of their heart, unto uncleanness: to dishonour their own bodies among themselves.

1:25. Who changed the truth of God into a lie and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

1:26. For this cause, God delivered them up to shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into that use which is against nature.

God delivered them up… Not by being author of their sins, but by withdrawing his grace, and so permitting them, in punishment of their pride, to fall into those shameful sins.

1:27. And, in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts, one towards another: men with men, working that which is filthy and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error.

1:28. And as they liked not to have God in their knowledge, God delivered them up to a reprobate sense, to do those things which are not convenient.

1:29. Being filled with all iniquity, malice, fornication, avarice, wickedness: full of envy, murder, contention, deceit, malignity: whisperers,

1:30. Detractors, hateful to God, contumelious, proud, haughty, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

1:31. Foolish, dissolute: without affection, without fidelity, without mercy.

1:32. Who, having known the justice of God, did not understand that they who do such things, are worthy of death: and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them.

Clearly it is not just the idolatry it is also there sexual actions which God detests. You can’t miss what he says about Homosexual sex. He describes it as unnatural, shameful affections. 1:27 speaks a lot of what I’m talking about. I can’t find where God says Homosexual sex is good

 

[adamhovey1988]

You can’t find it, because it’s not in there. Take it from someone who’s actually read the whole Bible.

 

[Andy_82]

In this instance Paul is pulling phrases from Leviticus in much the same way the author of that book used that term per the Septuagint. Which means, he is referencing men who have slept with men for pagan worship. This can mean men who’ve soiled themselves for money by working as temple prostitutes or those who have practiced gay sex rites in the past. Why else bring it up? Honestly, why else would being gay be offensive? It’s before Augustine and Augustine drew from Paul. Paul is referencing something of a practical matter here. Just saying being gay is an abomination doesn’t state as to why. There is always an underlying issue and that is it. No such word really existed in either Greek or Hebrew until Paul coined it here: which is why it is a hybrid. There is no specific definition for it beyond the context in which it is used.

 

[adamhovey1988]

You know what? I speak 5 languages and you’re treating me like an idiot, I’m pretty sure you’re in violation of tons of Forum rules at the moment. If you heard me talk in person, are you going to make fun of me because I have a Southern (American) accent? I’ll pray for you, I think maybe you should do the same for yourself.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Why else bring it up? Honestly, why else would being gay be offensive?

Aristotle claimed that homosexuality was most likely a psychological perversion. Plato was certainly same-sex attracted himself, but he also thought it was wrong to have gay sex, and thought it should be taboo. Both Plato and Aristotle were writing in a society with tons of accepted same-sex sexual relationships.

It’s not hard to find examples in the ancient world of strident objection to homosexual activity. That is the most obvious framework from which to read the passages discussing same-sex activity in the Bible.

I wonder what your sources are. Can you tell me? Are you a Bible scholar, or are you getting this second hand?

 

[theCardinalbird]

It centers around 1:25. Honestly, how can you just glaze over that and read the rest?

How can you glaze over that God says that these acts are shameful, that they dishonor the body, including shameful affections. Are you telling me that shameful affections and leaving the natural of use for women, burning in lust for other men, is just temple prostitution? How can you be blind in seeing that God does not approve of gay sex?

Yes they committed idolatry, but their Idolatry led the to commit these shameful acts which God detests. Don’t you see? Idolatry caused them to commit a whole lot of other sins that are even mentioned in 1:30. Leaving God and his law and idolizing these beings caused them to commit these sins because they reject his knowledge and reject his laws, and use there bodies to dishonor themselves and he who created them!

 

[Edward_H]

Show me an unbiased study on this topic.

It’s the most politicized topic in today’s world, polluting and degrading science.

Not a hint of science in anything on this topic…pure agenda.

Your point is laughable.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Splitting hairs? While there may not be a formal register for the English language as there is for French, the fact that usually are able to converse in a reasonably standardized form means there are existing norms to abide by.

You claimed that my sentence was ungrammatical, and haven’t substantiated the claim. Let’s keep our eye on the ball.