• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Homosexuality and Homosexual Marriages: Why do Christians Care?

1robin

Christian/Baptist
Is this is the basis of your argument? You should know that Paul Cameron is completely discredited. Using this as the basis of your arguments, they are now completely, categorically and unequivocally discredited. Thank you for shooting down your own arguments and shooting yourself in the foot. :)

Paul Cameron: Introduction

Paul Cameron’s Falsehoods Cited By Anti-Gay Sympathizers

Paul Cameron - Wikipedia

Paul Cameron Bio and Fact Sheet

Stick a fork in it, it's done.
Ok, Of the 40+ responses I got in 6 threads the last 2 days alone, 30 were in the homosexual thread. And that is after putting 2 or 3 people on my ignore list. I must do something to make responding to that many people manageable. I tried to put you on ignore as well because I am not debating someone who is so overly sensitive as to threaten to report me if they even detect what they may think was veiled sarcasm (whatever that is). However I apparently can't ignore staff members. Regardless, I got a little Christmas spirit over the weekend and since I could not ignore you, I am going to consolidate all these posts in another way that does not require my putting anyone on ignore yet. To do so though I need instructions on how to mention someone in a thread. I always quote posters and only mentioned one in a post a long time ago. So can you please message me about how to mention other posters in my response to several of them at the same time? If you can do so then I can do something that may lighten the load I am carrying enough to enable my responses. If not then I have no choice but to end my debates in the homosexual thread across the board to be fair to everyone here.

Thanks,
1robin

P.S. I already did so at least once so far, but I will also address your complaint about a source in the post I use to address everyone at once. BTW I was in the military during two wars. If I didn't shoot myself in the foot to save my life or to keep me from possibly having to take another's life, I am not going to do so in a silly debate to escape countless ineffective arguments. But I will get into all that in detail if you supply what I asked for.
 

1robin

Christian/Baptist
I'd say you should probably drop this one from your list.

You should drop your HIV/AIDS rates argument from your list as well, in my opinion. It ignores the global issue of HIV/AIDS in favour of focusing in one particular area apparently only because it supports the argument you are trying to make.


HIV/AIDS is most prevalent and most dangerous in Africa and always has been. To ignore Africa in a discussion of HIV/AIDS transmission is to draw a conclusion from incomplete and/or missing data which I don’t think is the best way to get to the truth of the matter.




These statistics are misleading though, as you know.



I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, your problem really appears to be with promiscuity and unsafe sexual practices.

You don’t really have a problem with sexual orientation, per se. More so with the sexual practices people engage in from all orientations.

Maybe I can help to clarify some of the issues people are having with your premises.

1. Homosexual behavior (sex) causes losses of health, life, and property to such a massive extent that whatever benefits result from it are not enough to morally justify the behavior.

2. Heterosexual behavior (sex) causes far lower losses of health, life, and property and has a much higher magnitude of benefits so that it can be morally justified.


I think one of the problems you are running into here stem from your assertion that you’re making a secular argument. These two statements do in fact appear to be secular in nature, but the problem comes in when it’s time to employ your definition of morality, because that is when you revert to a religious argument.

The other issue I find is that you don’t seem to recognize that there are any benefits that come from people living their lives freely and openly as homosexual individuals. You don’t seem to agree that two homosexuals raising children constitutes a family, for example.

And finally your premises don’t appear to hold true for lesbians, which I think is a huge problem for you given that they make up about half of the homosexual population.

I do like the fact that you're trying to come at it from a secular viewpoint though, but I'm not quite sure you've pulled it off.
Well this is bad timing. I get about 20 - 30 responses from this one thread everyday. Before you could post your argument here I had already decided to consolidate some stuff in my next official post in this thread. I however can only do so if someone explains how it is someone mentions others instead of quoting them. If you know how to do this can you please respond by explaining how? If I can ever figure it out then I can address your points above at the same time. Actually since I requested you make an argument for me to evaluate I may respond to you even if I must stop the rest of the discussions I am having here, the workload has simply become to great for the time I have but I will probably make the time to respond to you even if no other.
 

JerryL

Well-Known Member
To the OP:

Happenstance of timing. Being upset over inter-racial or inter-religious marriage is out of vogue.

Tribalism says that people need something to be upset about to distinguish "us" from "them"; and anger, it turns out, is a great motivator / distraction for those seeking to get or hold on to wealth or power.

Plus two guys kissing seems "oogy" and makes a man raised in male culture uncomfortable... especially since statistically he's likely to have some level of interest (note how some of the biggest anti-gay legislators have turned out to be gay?).

So don't worry about how I'm running the state budget into the ground to finance my gambling habit: I'm going to stop gay marriage!
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
Well this is bad timing. I get about 20 - 30 responses from this one thread everyday. Before you could post your argument here I had already decided to consolidate some stuff in my next official post in this thread. I however can only do so if someone explains how it is someone mentions others instead of quoting them. If you know how to do this can you please respond by explaining how? If I can ever figure it out then I can address your points above at the same time. Actually since I requested you make an argument for me to evaluate I may respond to you even if I must stop the rest of the discussions I am having here, the workload has simply become to great for the time I have but I will probably make the time to respond to you even if no other.
I would love to be able to tell you how to do that but unfortunately I have no idea either. :(
 

Jainarayan

ॐ नमो भगवते वासुदेवाय
Staff member
Premium Member
However I apparently can't ignore staff members.

I could have told you that. But you wouldn't have believed me. You had to find out for yourself. Not unlike Dorothy having to find out for herself that she always had the ability to go home.

Whaddya know... making a reference to Dorothy in a thread about homosexuality!

inconceivable.jpg


If not then I have no choice but to end my debates in the homosexual thread across the board to be fair to everyone here.

I'll try to get through this without calling my therapist.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
Happenstance of timing. Being upset over inter-racial or inter-religious marriage is out of vogue.
And now Christians will tell you how Christians were in the forefront of the battle for such basic marriage equality.
Ignoring the fact that Christians were also the main opposition.
I predict that within 20 years Christians will be claiming that they fought for queer equality as well.
People like 1robin will just be an embarrassment to the grandkids.
Tom
 

1robin

Christian/Baptist
I could have told you that. But you wouldn't have believed me. You had to find out for yourself. Not unlike Dorothy having to find out for herself that she always had the ability to go home.

Whaddya know... making a reference to Dorothy in a thread about homosexuality!

inconceivable.jpg




I'll try to get through this without calling my therapist.
Well, if nothing else you may prove entertaining if I can make references to the Princess Bride. It just hit me when I typed that, that the terms Princess Bride make no sense. Regardless, I bolded my request for you as to how to format the mentioning or other posters in a response. Why on earth, did you a (STAFF) member ignore that request to the detriment to all the others in the thread that want a reply from me? You are truly an anomaly.
 

1robin

Christian/Baptist
I would love to be able to tell you how to do that but unfortunately I have no idea either. :(
I asked a staff member this same question as well. They did not even respond to that question at all. This must be some kind of formatting Holy Grail. If I cannot find out how to do this soon then everyone that responded to me 4 and 5 times in a row each will be out of luck, but since you responded directly to a request from me to post an argument I will probably respond to you shortly.
 

Jainarayan

ॐ नमो भगवते वासुदेवाय
Staff member
Premium Member
Well, if nothing else you may prove entertaining if I can make references to the Princess Bride.

Yes, we gay men have a singular wit.

Why on earth, did you a (STAFF) member ignore that request to the detriment to all the others in the thread that want a reply from me?

Not ignored, just missed. To tag another poster put @ immediately in front of their name, e.g. @Jainarayan.

I can explain that.
You put a "@" in front of their screen name and it sends them an alert.
Not that this will help @1robin because he has me on ignore.
Tom

@columbus I gotcher back.
 

1robin

Christian/Baptist
@1robin (and for anyone who wants to read with interest and info)



No debate.
Hello, Carlita, as I have stated to others the responses I get in this homosexual thread in particular are so numerous that I do not have enough time to adequately respond to every single one. So I need to post a single response to all of the posters in this thread who wanted a response from me which should consolidate a lot of issues here and save time. To do so requires than I make a single post to a lot of posters at once, which means I need to know how to mention a list of posters instead of quoting each one individually. I have only mentioned posters once before, a long time ago and can't remember how I did it. You seem to have mentioned me here in your post, so can you explain to me how you formatted your mentioning of me here? If so then I may be able to handle everyone responding to me 4 or 5 times in a row in many cases, if no one can explain it I will only respond to SkepticalThinker because their argument cam eat my specific request.
 

pearl

Well-Known Member
I know homosexuality has pretty much run its course here on RF, but I can't remember this specific point having been addressed, and just to be clear I'll restate the question.

Why do Christians care that people of the same gender engage in sex, and why do they care that they marry each other? Even caring to the point of voicing their objections and protesting?


The biblical authors had no knowledge of sexual orientation and judged the act simply to be one of perversion. Many Christians, among others, refuse to accept the possibility that homosexuality is not a choice and judge it as perversion. Otherwise one would have to admit that Isaiah, 'I knew you in the womb, called you by name,..' would also apply to the homosexual. I think we some times use, misuse the Bible to our personal beliefs.
 

1robin

Christian/Baptist
That information is in the same book. It is not new, it is different.
Again,

1. There are revelations given at one time that are repeated verbatim at a later point.
2. There are revelations given at one time that are either given in more detail or in less detail at a later point.
3. There are teachings given at one point and the same teaching given at a later point in completely new language.
4. There are teachings given that are not simply versions of teachings given at an earlier point, they do not contradict earlier teachings but are completely new teachings.

Every single one of those is an example of progressive revelation. Frankly what your arguing against isn't progressive revelation. What your talking about is post biblical revelation. If progressive revelation had never occurred the bible would not even exist.



Give you best 3 examples.
It would take months or even years to determine what the best examples are, so I will just supply good examples.

1. The concept of the law in the OT was completely replaced by the concept of grace in the NT concerning salvation. Sin could not be forgive in the OT, sin's dept was simply pushed forward a year at a time by the animal sacrifices in the OT. However when Christ appeared the sin debt could be completely eradicated from a believers legal record.
2. Or take the concept of the temple's veil. In the OT all humans were separated from God by sin, however when Christ died the veil was torn in half to symbolize that for the first time since Adam fell we could be directly united with God.
3. Or take the prophecy made to Israel that when the diaspora ended that God would for the first time in human history God would plant Israel back in the land he originally gave them but after this particular event that God would never again allow anyone to drive the Hebrews out of it.

However this is not really necessary. Everything in the bible is progressive revelation. God chose a specific time (no matter when that was) to reveal things for the first time. Everything God did after the initial creation was a unique events that occurred at a unique time in man's history.

But if you want more anyway:

Psalm 78:1-4, "Listen, O my people, to my instruction; Incline your ears to the words of my mouth. 2 I will open my mouth in a parable; I will utter dark sayings of old, 3 Which we have heard and known, And our fathers have told us. 4 We will not conceal them from their children, But tell to the generation to come the praises of the Lord, And His strength and His wondrous works that He has done."
  • Matthew 13:17, "For truly I say to you, that many prophets and righteous men desired to see what you see, and did not see it; and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it."
  • Matthew 13:35, "so that what was spoken through the prophet might be fulfilled, saying, “I will open My mouth in parables; I will utter things hidden since the foundation of the world."
  • John 5:39, "You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me."
  • Romans 16:25-26, "Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery which has been kept secret for long ages past, 26 but now is manifested, and by the Scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the eternal God, has been made known to all the nations, leading to obedience of faith."
  • 1 Corinthians 2:7-8, "but we speak God’s wisdom in a mystery, the hidden wisdom, which God predestined before the ages to our glory; 8 the wisdom which none of the rulers of this age has understood; for if they had understood it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory."
  • Hebrews 1:1-2, "God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, 2 in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world."
  • 1 Peter 1:10-12, "As to this salvation, the prophets who prophesied of the grace that would come to you made careful search and inquiry, 11 seeking to know what person or time the Spirit of Christ within them was indicating as He predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories to follow. 12 It was revealed to them that they were not serving themselves, but you, in these things which now have been announced to you through those who preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven—things into which angels long to look."
What is progressive revelation and is it scriptural? | CARM Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry
Man is basically the same today as he was in Genesis. That is what Jesus said---they were eating and drinking, marrying and being given in marriage.
I have never said any different. In fact I said that both God and man's essential natures have always been the same. What I actually said was that mankind's general knowledge base has increased on an unimaginable scale. It is simple logic to conclude that God could and should have been able to communicate and expect different things from Moses and Billy Graham. It is speculated that mankind has learned far more in the last 100 years than we have in the rest of human history combined. Any God worthy of the title would be aware of that and accommodate it.





I will wait for your examples.
See the above but that is just the tip of the ice burg.



The truth the Holy Spirit is going to guide us into is the truths we find in Scripture. That there progressive revelation is an LDS doctrine.
The Holy Spirit did both. He supplied the scriptures and he reveals things to individual Christians that are not in the Bible. In fact Jesus said that until he was taken bodily into heaven after he was resurrected that Holy Spirit would not come. This issue gets a little complicated but he did state what I claimed here.

And no it did not originate with LDS doctrine.

What Is Progressive Revelation?

The entire bible is progressive revelation.
 

1robin

Christian/Baptist
Yes, we gay men have a singular wit.
I am well aware that homosexuals have a singular view of reality but since my comment was that both you and I can reference The Princess Bride, then that emphatically entails that your wit (at least) is not singular.



Not ignored, just missed. To tag another poster put @ immediately in front of their name, e.g. @Jainarayan.
Thanks.



@columbus I gotcher back.
I do not know what this means and since Columbus was one of the couple of posters I gave up on I will not see what they post.

Regardless, now that you have stated how I can go about doing what I intended I will begin the effort. Since I intend to use one post to try and prevent all the things that frustrate me about those who defend homosexuality (almost exclusively among all subject matters in this forum) it will take me a while.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
I think we some times use, misuse the Bible to our personal beliefs.
One of Jesus's top meta-messages was "Don't put too much Faith in human authorities or Scripture. Do the right thing, even if someone teaches you something else. That's what God wants."
But modern Christians have gone back to the legalistic ways of the Jewish authorities that Jesus opposed.
Tom
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
I do not know what this means and since Columbus was one of the couple of posters I gave up on I will not see what they post.
You gave up on me because you couldn't defend your arguments. You keep insisting that 4000 AIDS deaths in the USA is more important than the 1,100,000 AIDS deaths worldwide, in 2015.
Tom
 

JerryL

Well-Known Member
The biblical authors had no knowledge of sexual orientation and judged the act simply to be one of perversion. Many Christians, among others, refuse to accept the possibility that homosexuality is not a choice and judge it as perversion.
Actually: It's mentioned (only once in the OT) as an abomination: like growing crops side-by-side or wearing a cotton-wool blend.

It's then mentioned once more by Paul, who also doesn't like heterosexual relationships but says (of marriage) (paraphrased) "well: if you really can't control yourself then OK).
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
The biblical authors had no knowledge of sexual orientation and judged the act simply to be one of perversion. Many Christians, among others, refuse to accept the possibility that homosexuality is not a choice and judge it as perversion. Otherwise one would have to admit that Isaiah, 'I knew you in the womb, called you by name,..' would also apply to the homosexual. I think we some times use, misuse the Bible to our personal beliefs.
A lot!


.


.
 

pearl

Well-Known Member
But modern Christians have gone back to the legalistic ways of the Jewish authorities that Jesus opposed.

Not only of the Jewish authorities who gave some 613 precepts, the Catholic Church has over 2000 canons in the code of Canon Law!
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
Not only of the Jewish authorities who gave some 613 precepts, the Catholic Church has over 2000 canons in the code of Canon Law!
I like the Catholic Church.
I don't believe in Christianity.

I'm with Jesus. Forget the scriptures and the priests when they tell you nonsensical things that aren't good.
Tom
 
Top