• 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!

That Whole Homosexual--Sin Thing

Salvador

RF's Swedenborgian
Don't care. Jesus Christ isn't the only one people listen to. And Leviticus slams homosexual acts quite well on its own.

.

Leviticus only applies to the ancient tribe of Israel. The Apostle Paul writings only applies to the early Church. Nobody nowadays has to follow what Leviticus or Paul has written.
 

Stanyon

WWMRD?
Gay men regularly ingest medically significant amounts of feaces through some of their sexual practices.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
No, it does not. That is anti-scientific hogwash. Where did you learn this dangerous lie? Is that what the murderous psychopath, Duterte, is having people taught in your country? Anyone can get HIV and everyone has to protect themselves against it. Most people with HIV are heterosexuals who acquired it from hetero sex.
There is a kernel of truth to that. In the U.S. back in the bad old days when gay people had almost no rights and society was highly prejudicial against them many did get involved in promiscuous relationships. And it takes only one promiscuous person to spread the virus widely. Back then the vast majority of American AIDS cases were homosexual with IV drug users close behind. It was very rare among straight couples. There were probably several factors that contributed to this, but AIDS became known as a "gay disease". That may have been the truth here, but it was not the case worldwide.
 

Salvador

RF's Swedenborgian
I
While, as I understand it, it's no sin to have a homosexual attachment to someone, as long as it isn't lustful I guess, it does imply that once pee pees touch or hoo-has meet it's all over. Think of it. Let the sexual organs of two homosexuals get as close as possible while still leaving breathing space between them and you're home free. BUT let the two touch for just a fraction of a second and god will have picked up on it and punched your ticket to hell.

.

Would a condom count as an adequately safe space between one man's joy stick and another man's sticky anal canal?

Does a man's joy stick covered with a condom block your hypothetical God's gay-dar from detecting a gay man's condom covered penis inside another man's rectum?
 
Last edited:

Saint Frankenstein

Wanderer From Afar
Premium Member
There is a kernel of truth to that. In the U.S. back in the bad old days when gay people had almost no rights and society was highly prejudicial against them many did get involved in promiscuous relationships. And it takes only one promiscuous person to spread the virus widely. Back then the vast majority of American AIDS cases were homosexual with IV drug users close behind. It was very rare among straight couples. There were probably several factors that contributed to this, but AIDS became known as a "gay disease". That may have been the truth here, but it was not the case worldwide.
Oh, I know. I know all about the history of HIV in America. It just sounds like he is saying that gay sex causes HIV, which is very worrying.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
There's no such thing as God having gay-dar.

Your Bible quote comes from Paul, who was a homophobic person; nowhere in the New Testament does Jesus Christ himself condemn homosexuality.
It's actually quite possible that Paul wasn't so much "homophobic," as it is that he was terrified of his own inclination. That's something that's been common throughout all of human history, as people who recognize that have homoerotic feelings attempt to either come to grips with them, bury them, or possibly either kill themselves or try to live in both worlds...with neither world finding out about the other.

Bishop John Shelby Spong (Episcopal/Anglican church) certainly has speculated that Paul's much vaunted "thorn" was most likely a taste for his own gender, which scared him to death.
 

Enoch07

It's all a sick freaking joke.
Premium Member
What is so wrong about an act, which only brings pleasure and hurts no one, that god considers it a sin? So much so, in fact, that if one engages in homosexual sex god will bar such an unrepentant or ignorant sinner from Heaven.

1. It's wrong because sex is for reproduction. That is the reason we have sexual organs and reproductive systems.

2. It's forgiveable, like most sin, so it does not bar anyone from Heaven.

Before you ask, yes masturbation, oral, heteroanal sex is a sin as well, and it counts as the same sin as homosexuality as far as I can tell. Better for a man's seed to lie in the belly of a prostitute, than upon the earth.
 

InChrist

Free4ever
So what? Isn't it obvious that right now I don't care about the other sins, just homosexual sex?


Fine. It's somewhat obvious that it's against his design, but why would god design a being wherein a pleasurable, harmless activity be deemed harmful? And, just how does homosexual sex harm his design? AND how do you know this?

.
How do you know it is harmless? God is Love, not lust. Pleasure is fine and a gift when it is enjoyed within love. Lust or pleasure purely for the sake of pleasure is a misuse of the gift as God intended. In other words it is a perversion and abusive. Eating a gallon of ice cream in one sitting may bring temporary pleasure to some people. Others may get pleasure from sex with kids or shooting up heroin, drinking to excess, or any number of things, but these practices are harmful to oneself and often others. God desires the best for His creation. That is the reason He is against practices which are outside His design and bring damage to ourselves or others.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
OH... But he DID say so, and so it must be true! Everything @Skwim said in his OP MUST be true... he knows the Bible so much, his hermeneutical capacity is off the roof, so he must be right.
I don't think that @Skwim would take that as a valid answer. But he might not mind if you start to worship him.
 

Stanyon

WWMRD?
I know you're a troll doing what trolls do, but evidence? That sounds like one of Paul Cameron's old claims, and he's a hateful quack.

About a year ago I was going to make a thread showing that gay and bisexual males were more a threat to public health than firearms in terms of spreading HIV vs. deaths by firearms. As a test I cited information from the CDC (Centre for Disease Control) and other physicians, I was told by a few posters that I was singling out homosexual and bisexual males. Truth sometimes doesn't fit the popular narratives and falsehoods, just like the fact that non-Whites commit hate crimes at a disproportionate rate, over twice as high than Whites when taking population numbers into account and the fact that hate crimes by Whites have overall decreased over the last decade.
 
Last edited:

Saint Frankenstein

Wanderer From Afar
Premium Member
About a year ago I was going to make a thread showing that gay and bisexual males were more a threat to public health than firearms in terms of spreading HIV. As a test I cited information from the CDC (Centre for Disease Control) and other physicians, I was told by a few posters that I was singling out homosexual and bisexual males. Truth sometimes doesn't fit the popular narratives and falsehoods, just like the fact that non-Whites commit hate crimes at a disproportionate rate, over twice as high when taking population numbers into account.
I still don't see a citation for your claim, just blather.
 
Top