|
The Bible condemns homosexuality.
|
 (April 20, 2018 at 2:29 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: The Bible condemns sexual immorality of all kinds. Homosexuality no different than any other sexual relations outside the bond of marriage. I take it you've never choked the chicken then?
It's amazing 'science' always seems to 'find' whatever it is funded for, and never the oppsite. Drich.
 (April 20, 2018 at 12:02 am)Godscreated Wrote: Thank you for the clean response. Jesus never had children with anyone, it wasn't what He came to do. Being that Christ is the creator then it is His right exclusively to say what is sexually right and wrong. Because this act has been condemned from the first time it is recorded in the scripture till the end of scriptures makes it wrong always and all times, God condemns it completely. To add those other books would put contradiction into scriptures, contradictions even with the OT, so no they are not fit for the scriptures of God. Of course Jesus had sexual relations with a woman and had children. You simply refuse to believe it. Even though dated scripture verifies it. Rather, you would prefer to ignore such scripture for that which was constructed by fallible man into a book that he thought was more beneficial to the Christian belief system. Considering that Christ never said anything about homosexuality..... Ironically, Greek society predates Christ. The Greeks had no such issue with homosexuality. In fact, no one had any issue with it until Paul, but then even the fallible interpretation of that demented man is debatable.
"Never trust a fox. Looks like a dog, behaves like a cat."
~ Erin Hunter 
One of the first instructions God issued was to be fruitful and multiply. I note Jesus was on record as being 'pro' fulfilling the law, so hard to imagine He messed up on this one.
IIRC, the Mormons share this opinion. And it's not really an 'opinion' there being actual Scripture backing it up. The granting of a pardon is an imputation of guilt, and the acceptance a confession of it.
If homosexuality is wrong, why is it so prolific in nature?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexu...in_animals
I believe in life before death.
 (April 21, 2018 at 8:25 am)Antares Wrote: If homosexuality is wrong, why is it so prolific in nature? The fundamentalists would say that such animals are depraved, possessed by demons, etc. It's a question of falsifiability, in that it is impossible to ever "disprove" what the Christian evangelicals say.  (April 21, 2018 at 8:25 am)Antares Wrote: If homosexuality is wrong, why is it so prolific in nature? There is actually a fallacy called the argument from nature. It doesn’t follow, that because it occurs in nature, that it is right to do so. Im sure that there are a lot of things in nature, which most ethical people would frown upon, when humans do it.
It is said that an argument is what convinces reasonable men and a proof is what it takes to convince even an unreasonable man. - Alexander Vilenkin
If I am shown my error, I will be the first to throw my books into the fire. - Martin Luther
Yet there's nothing unnatural about homosexuality from a psychological perspective; and I certainly trust that perspective more than the primitive biblical perspective.
"Never trust a fox. Looks like a dog, behaves like a cat."
~ Erin Hunter (April 21, 2018 at 8:30 am)Jehanne Wrote:(April 21, 2018 at 8:25 am)Antares Wrote: If homosexuality is wrong, why is it so prolific in nature? Yet we see craven de facto falsification from the Christians themselves when they selectively invoke SOME Levitical strictures and not others. AFAIC, they pull out one edict from Leviticus, they are bound by ALL of them, it's a motes and beams thing, and Jesus was clear about that. Even if His followers aren't. The granting of a pardon is an imputation of guilt, and the acceptance a confession of it.
(April 21, 2018 at 9:04 am)RoadRunner79 Wrote: There is actually a fallacy called the argument from nature. It doesn’t follow, that because it occurs in nature, that it is right to do so. Im sure that there are a lot of things in nature, which most ethical people would frown upon, when humans do it. There is also a fallacy called equivocation. Although you didn’t state it outright you are trying equate homosexual behaviour in the animal world with the repulsive shit that animals get up to; infanticide, cannibalism and eating their pray alive. Your 'argument from nature' is nothing more than a bastardisation of the 'Naturalistic Fallacy', you tortured it to make it say what you wanted. It's an old and oh so familiar fundie tactic.
It's amazing 'science' always seems to 'find' whatever it is funded for, and never the oppsite. Drich.
 ![[Image: guOzbRr5_o.jpg]](https://images2.imgbox.com/ee/38/guOzbRr5_o.jpg)
teachings of the Bible are so muddled and self-contradictory that it was possible for Christians to happily burn heretics alive for five long centuries. It was even possible for the most venerated patriarchs of the Church, like St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, to conclude that heretics should be tortured (Augustine) or killed outright (Aquinas). Martin Luther and John Calvin advocated the wholesale murder of heretics, apostates, Jews, and witches. - Sam Harris, "Letter To A Christian Nation"
|
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
