• 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!

Why did God create homosexuality?

Kelly of the Phoenix

Well-Known Member
Flamboyant and effeminate behaviour, cross-dressing and transvestites for male gender humans. Butch and tom-boy behaviour for female genders. There is an extreme conflict between their physiology and their behaviour.
Lol. The Bible says wearing two types of fabric is an abomination. Better check your tags.
 

Kelly of the Phoenix

Well-Known Member
I said that within even hetero people come many vices as in deviant practices like S&M, role playing, toys, abuse, selfishness, hedonism, objectification, etc... Thus, all have to control their innate compulsions in some way or another. If a man is being sexually attracted to another man, he has to refrain from carrying out his desires and try to understand and cure the catalyst behind such impulses.
See, while it’s not my thing, I would argue toys are more moral because someone can expend their energy without hurting anyone real.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Since you're so concerned about my understanding of evidence, why don't you send me the "evidence" you have to support your above claim. Give me a picture of what evidence is. I don't deny that I'm new to this and have only been at it about 6 months. That being said I have only touched on a couple topics thus far and neither involves creation or the exodus. Because I'm new to this I have not built an extensive knowledge base yet. My biggest evidence currently is personal and is only effective in addressing those who knew me before now or those who already believe. Note that I did NOT say my only evidence simply my best currently
"Personal" evidence is almost never reliable evidence. But let's go over one example. Scientific evidence consists of observations that support or deny a scientific theory or scientific hypothesis. That evidence is going to be of an objective nature. That means that anyone can make the same observation.

That is the standard that scientists use. It makes it very easy to determine if something qualifies as evidence or not. One only needs to determine the answers to two questions. First is the idea falsifiable? If there is not some reasonable test that is based on the merits of the idea that cannot possibly refute it the idea is not scientific and cannot have any scientific evidence for it. The second question is does the observation support the theory? If the answer to both questions is yes then one has scientific evidence.

One also has to be careful with words like "proof". Technically proof is limited to mathematics when it comes to concepts and beliefs. In the real world their is only evidence. And that is very often lacking. People may fool themselves, but when rational reasoning is applied a lot of evidence goes away.
 
"Personal" evidence is almost never reliable evidence. But let's go over one example. Scientific evidence consists of observations that support or deny a scientific theory or scientific hypothesis. That evidence is going to be of an objective nature. That means that anyone can make the same observation.

That is the standard that scientists use. It makes it very easy to determine if something qualifies as evidence or not. One only needs to determine the answers to two questions. First is the idea falsifiable? If there is not some reasonable test that is based on the merits of the idea that cannot possibly refute it the idea is not scientific and cannot have any scientific evidence for it. The second question is does the observation support the theory? If the answer to both questions is yes then one has scientific evidence.

One also has to be careful with words like "proof". Technically proof is limited to mathematics when it comes to concepts and beliefs. In the real world their is only evidence. And that is very often lacking. People may fool themselves, but when rational reasoning is applied a lot of evidence goes away.
I agree with your statement here, which is why I stated that my best evidence, currently, only really works with those who have known me for 5 years or more; because they are witness to the change; or people who already believe in God because they accept without question that he changed me. That being said I still would like to know what your evidence that says I need to disregard the first two books of the Bible is, I do not just accept either side of the argument without something irrefutable. Again my research has not touched Genesis or Exodus so please, once again, offer your evidence instead of a definition of evidence
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
I agree with your statement here, which is why I stated that my best evidence, currently, only really works with those who have known me for 5 years or more; because they are witness to the change; or people who already believe in God because they accept without question that he changed me. That being said I still would like to know what your evidence that says I need to disregard the first two books of the Bible is, I do not just accept either side of the argument without something irrefutable. Again my research has not touched Genesis or Exodus so please, once again, offer your evidence instead of a definition of evidence
People can change for a whole host of reasons. Even a false belief can cause that so change for good or bad is far from qualifying as evidence for something.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
See, while it’s not my thing, I would argue toys are more moral because someone can expend their energy without hurting anyone real.
Are you saying that batteries are not real?

upload_2021-10-19_8-21-42.png


You uncaring monster!!
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
Exactly.



Absolutely.

These two statements of yours show that this so called science based thinking or what ever you brought up in your post is just an unproven theory with no evidence. It could be very different based on peoples prejudices.
My point, since you seem to have missed it, is that I think it is a very good idea to at least make the effort to get past our prejudices, and think on the basis of actual information.
 

Praise Jah

Psalm 83:18
Sorry, but that appears to be just a fairy tale.
God cannot lie. (Titus 1:2) Jehovah the Creator made male and female and ordained marriage as the proper arrangement for the multiplication of the human race. (Genesis 1:27-28)

If a fairy tale then you and the rest of mankind wouldn't exist.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
God cannot lie. (Titus 1:2) Jehovah the Creator made male and female and ordained marriage as the proper arrangement for the multiplication of the human race. (Genesis 1:27-28)

If a fairy tale then you and the rest of mankind wouldn't exist.
If God cannot lie then you cannot interpret Genesis literally. The evidence against the myths of Genesis are so strong that to claim that they were real is calling God a liar.

And no, we understood how humanity arose. It is not the fairy tale from the Bible.
 
Last edited:

Praise Jah

Psalm 83:18
Funny how Jesus wouldn’t have been born if Judah didn’t think his daughter-in-law was a prostitute. Apparently God is fine with promiscuity if certain characters do it.
While Judah did have sexual relations with a woman he thought was a harlot, in reality she was not a harlot.

At that time, brother-in-law marriage was practiced. This required that when a man died without an heir, his brother was to provide the widow with the basis for an heir. Before Judah’s firstborn son had any sons by his wife, Tamar, he was put to death because he proved to be bad in the eyes of Jehovah. Judah’s second son, Onan, refused to fulfill his obligation of brother‐in‐law marriage. So, he died as a result of divine judgment.

Judah then sent Tamar back to her father’s home until the time Judah’s third son, Shelah, was old enough to be united with her. But as the years went by, Judah failed to give Shelah in marriage to Tamar. So when Judah lost his wife in death, Tamar devised a plan to get an heir by Judah.

When the truth came out, Judah did not blame Tamar, but humbly said: “She is more righteous than I am, for the reason that I did not give her to Shelah my son.” (Genesis 38:26)

Judah acted wrongly in that he did not give Tamar to his third son, Shelah, as promised. He also had relations with a woman he thought was a temple prostitute. This was contrary to God’s purpose, which was for a man to have sexual relations only in the marriage arrangement. (Genesis 2:24) In reality, though, Judah did not have relations with a harlot. Rather, he unwittingly took the place of his son Shelah in performing brother-in-law marriage and thus fathered legal offspring.

As for Tamar, her course was not an immoral one and her twin sons were not considered to be the sons of fornication. (Matthew 1:1-3)
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
While Judah did have sexual relations with a woman he thought was a harlot, in reality she was not a harlot.

At that time, brother-in-law marriage was practiced. This required that when a man died without an heir, his brother was to provide the widow with the basis for an heir. Before Judah’s firstborn son had any sons by his wife, Tamar, he was put to death because he proved to be bad in the eyes of Jehovah. Judah’s second son, Onan, refused to fulfill his obligation of brother‐in‐law marriage. So, he died as a result of divine judgment.

Judah then sent Tamar back to her father’s home until the time Judah’s third son, Shelah, was old enough to be united with her. But as the years went by, Judah failed to give Shelah in marriage to Tamar. So when Judah lost his wife in death, Tamar devised a plan to get an heir by Judah.

When the truth came out, Judah did not blame Tamar, but humbly said: “She is more righteous than I am, for the reason that I did not give her to Shelah my son.” (Genesis 38:26)

Judah acted wrongly in that he did not give Tamar to his third son, Shelah, as promised. He also had relations with a woman he thought was a temple prostitute. This was contrary to God’s purpose, which was for a man to have sexual relations only in the marriage arrangement. (Genesis 2:24) In reality, though, Judah did not have relations with a harlot. Rather, he unwittingly took the place of his son Shelah in performing brother-in-law marriage and thus fathered legal offspring.

As for Tamar, her course was not an immoral one and her twin sons were not considered to be the sons of fornication. (Matthew 1:1-3)
Actually Judah was shown to be a rather vile hypocrite. He was ready to kill his own daughter in law for supposedly becoming a prostitute when he willingly went to one himself.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Reading comprehension and logical fallacy fail. You refuse to reason rationally so you won't let yourself.see your error.
I see you are still unable to respond to what I said so instead you continue to obfuscate and point out all my faults.
Nothing new here. Do you have any faults of your own?

26: O SON OF BEING! How couldst thou forget thine own faults and busy thyself with the faults of others? Whoso doeth this is accursed of Me. The Hidden Words of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 10
By the way,this belief of yours,that homosexuality is immoral is evidence against the existence of your god.
Why do you think that? God did not create homosexuality.
 
Top