Unanswered questions

[Drich]

No. The Bible never speaks openly against it. Even the story of Sodom and Gomorrah never specifies that it's a sin. God is unhappy with the sinful nature of the people there, but it's never stated that their sexual behavior is the result of his displeasure.

the attemp to strip the bible of the book chapter and various verses that openly denounce homosexuality and identify it as a sin is nothing new. Even if you take all the bible says against homosexuality, you still do not have a Santified pretext in which homosexual behavior is permitted. Because with out doubt the bible deems all sexual activity even the thought of it outside the confines of a Santified marriage a sin. If the bible or God does not allow a provision for homosexual sex, then any and all homosexual sex (even the thought of it) becomes a sexual sin. Not an especially bad sexual sin, but a sexual sin none the less, just like any other.

Skip ahead a couple chapters, and Lot has sex with his daughters anyway, even though he was apparently the most righteous man in the entire city. You could say his daughters were the unrighteous ones, but try to explain to me how these girls were able to date rape their father and bear him children? To keep his dick erect for this act, it had to be consensual. Not only that, but he never kicked out his daughters for being pregnant without a husband. Remember, this is the most righteous man in all of the wicked city.

lot also lived in a time before the law.

Does the Bible ever condemn homosexuality?

[/quote]We can't tell for certain, but does it speak out against it? Never. We do get a passage or two about a man cleaving to wife, but it never says that a man will not have sex with another man, or have thoughts of another man, or anything else of this nature. Your interpretation of the Bible's passages includes homosexual tendencies as a sin, even without it ever actually addressing the issue.[/quote]
In no less than 13 different places the bible openly identifies homosexuality a sin. http://www.gotquestions.org/homosexuality-Bible.html

But again even if you ripped out those pages and or some how you silence the bible on its stance, you still do not have a Santified pretext in which homosexual sex is permitted. With out this permission, homosexual sex like any sex outside the confines of a Santified marriage is a sin.

I don't play nice, and now you're trying to mess with my words.

thats just it sport, its not your word, it apart of the English lexicon and as such is subject to the definitions found in reference material like merrium-webster's dictionary.

beggs the question.

It doesn't beg any questions.

do you not understand what the logical fallacy 'begs the question' means?
http://public.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/begs.html

In your orginal question you asserted that if I did not like gay porn I was only inclined to straight porn. Not allowing for the option of not liking porn at all. The fallacy comes in because you need to provide proof of your assertion that limits me to only two options.

You made this thread for questions, and I'm going to damn well ask them.

your right I made this thread for question. I will answer questions. However I will not answer logical fallacies. Even if you frame your logical fallacy in question form. A logical fallacy is still a logical fallacy no matter how you frame it. For me to participate in your fallacy will only push the conversation to whatever fore gone conclusion you may have. This is a form of intelectual dishonesty, that I will not be apart of.

Interesting. So you're not interested in performing in one yourself, but do you ever watch them in porn?

i was exposed to porn at a very young age and struggled with everyday of my life. Even now my mind will wander to things I've seen if I am not careful, about who or what I surround myself with. That is why I do not like or watches certain mainstream movies or shows. And why I have not carried over any of my friends from before my conversion. Because they wanted to live a life I no longer wanted for myself.

I'm just trying to find out how you personally feel about sexual acts because this is very connected to what we're discussing here.

I am for them in the proper context. (A Santified marriage.)

Not doomed, but we definitely run the risk. The thing that we all agree on in society is that even if we have sexual appetites that are outside the social norms,

That is a very slippery slope. Social norms are only based on the self righteousness a given soceity allows for itself. Look at how quickly homosexuality went from social taboo to a social mandate in this country. All it takes is a desensitization through over exposure and the society yields its current morality to the first person to question the norm.

...the sanity of the majority of the world population of men who grew up in the 80's with pictures or posters of either of those two on the wall is in tact.

That can't possibly have anything to do with them coming to grips with reality...

Why is denying your sexually 'reality' in one instance, and in another putting you at risk for mental instability?

I'd like to see a quote by a psychologist that actually holds to this standard that you are proposing. By this train of thought, we would also have more cases of rape and other sexual misdemeanors than we would know what to do with, if this was really the philosophy we are following. No...it must be something else. I wonder what it could be...?

You can find a psychologist to agree with what ever you think is right. Psychology is the societal art of justification. Whatever a given psychologist feels justified in doing he can back with research.

I'm also interested in what you consider to be societal decline. Really. This should be good.

the attack and degradation of the traditional family. History records societal degradation and eventually a fall, when the tradition family model has been corrupted or replaced. Greece, Rome, Korea, china, Japan have all experienced societal decline when the traditional family was compromised.

So the father is always right in every family?

Do you always move the goal post when your questions have been answered? You asked what I would do.. Not what every other father does.

You think this happens every time that a person leaves his family on bad terms?

in my orginal post I pointed out that some lost sons do not come back.

again not disowned. I am giving her and her baby daddy an oppertunity to be the adults they were pretending to be. When there pride runs out they will return.

I'm sensing some backpedaling, but I don't think you see it. Anyway, we'll go with this last statement for now.

I'm not back peddling. My intention is and will always be to mirror the example given to us by Christ. I simply clarified my position when you wrongly labeled my efforts. You are quick to judge, slow to understand and wreckless in how you apply your judgments on to other people.

Fine, not disowned. But I do think you're being a little insincere about what you think the situation entails every time. I'll make another wager with you that perhaps if this happens, you'll be the best dad ever and even let them rent out your basement for a nominal fee! Another $50 says you do just that!

No basements in my state.

this has nothing to do with what is being discussed.

Or you don't want to discuss is because you know I'm right about this. Whether or not you disown your kids who you believe are sexually errant is one thing, but not forgiving them is another. That's the point this passage in the Bible is trying to illustrate, and it's actually my favorite one of all the Jeebus fairytales.

It's really too bad that most scholars agree that it's an interpolation that made its way into the Gospel of John well after it was written. Christians actually use that fact as a basis to ignore the teaching within the passage.

This passage speaks to personal judgement, sentencing someone to physical death, and attempting to execute that person. None of these things have anything to do with what is being discussed.
I have judged anyone the warrants a death sentence.

Well aren't you a ray of sunshine? This is blatant arrogance on your part to think so highly of your beliefs that you should want your "wayward" son to grovel at your feet like a servant to a master. Do this to your kids, and I guaran-fucking-tee you that you do not have what constitutes a healthy relationship with them.

So? Honestly what do I care that I do not measure up to your standards? Isn't that the point of being a Christian? We look to God for instruction and not soceity.

Stop. Your generosity is misplaced. If you assume that we know nothing of the Bible, then you've just made an ass of yourself on that assumption alone. Most of us come from Christian backgrounds on this site, myself included. My experience involves missionary work.

that is exactly my point. Most of you guys have very limited experience in Christianity and some how believe because you ladled soup in hati after the hurricans or even spend 30 years in a church never having missed a Sunday, this somehow places you in a position to use the bible to rebuke or correct someone who has spent the lions share of their lives studying scripture.

FYI. A formal education as a pastor does not an expert make.

But you being a missionary does... Yeah.