Homosexuality - a moral issue?

[Neil D]

Quote:

You claimed God does not view homosexuality as an abomination.

Ok, so how come when I say that the concept of the "wrongness of homosexuality" did NOT make it to the top 10 Commandment?

If homosexuality was so bad, why didn't God mention it in the 10 Commandments? Instead, the only 'sexual reference" is about adultery...not homosexuality..why? I have to conclude that homosexuality is NOT that bad, even though listed as an "abomination"....Perhaps you ought to look up in the bible other things that were concidered to be "abominations"....."mixed marriages" "unjust weights" "Lying lips" are a few of the abominations that I found....Even being proud is an abomination...

You concluded that I am then misinterpreting the scriptures, (whilst also insinuating the idea that I am a vicious monster that is out to persecute all homosexuals), without ever explaining how you have come to your own position of authority, whilst denying the scripture?

Isn't that true? Hate speech is a monstrous idea..especially when misrepresenting the Lord of Love. I have taken no position of authority, except to explain the results of your untenable position...thru the use of the results of human nature...you obviously have not felt the keen sting of the community's values when they have rejected your position, otherwise, you would not be in this position that you currently are in now....

you have tried to change the boundarys of the arguement, put words in my mouth that were never there, been too proud to admit that you were mistaken in your assumptions when others have clearly shown that your position is totally untenable... I hope that some day that you will see just how monsterous this position truely is....especially in light of reconsiling one to the Lord of Love.

[Twilight II]

Emptycross,

1. If your gods are supplying a standard for "their" followers, then it is subjective, not absolute.

So you have no basis for absolute morality with this argument.

2. Yes you have moral authority over your children, but is it absolute? No, the government can over ride your authority.

And the fact you have authority over your children only proves subjective morality, absolute morality would imply authority ove ALL children...

3. I am not demanding you adopt my worldview, I am simply stating that your worldview cannot make any sense of the world, because it does not account for the existance of absolute moral standards. Therefore it fails as a worldview to account for life and explain the purpose and existence of life.

4. Yes you do have absolute moral standards, because you live in a universe created by God, that created the concept of absolute moral standards, that is not the issue. The issue is you cannot account for them in your own worldview.

5. Your worldview allows for many gods, but again it cannot explain the existance of transcendental laws.

6. Your worldview demands the bible be just "any book". I recognise you assumption for what it is.

7. Without the Christian God, there is no accounting for the material universe and the laws of mind, that help us to measure that universe. Without the Christian God, there is just blind faith.

8. I do not accept your idea that God is impersonal and part of us, but let us say that I did for a moment.

Upon what basis would you define what is right and wrong, if we are all equally god and define our own concepts of right and wrong?

[Twilight II]

twilight you would do well to do a word study on all the sins are are abominations to God,

and class this one sin you refer to with all those sins, and then perhaps you will discover the perspective others are sharing with you.

no one is asking you to deny anything biblical, only that you get the perspective on abominations to God across the board, then see a more balanced view.

if you lie it is an abomination

if you worship God with less then your whole heart it is an abomination

if you do business with dishonest measurements or scales it is an abomination... basically sin is an abomination to God across the board.

the death penalty was once given for kids that persisted in disobedience, and for gathering wood on Sabbath, so this places the abomination of homosexuality on even par with working on Sabbath and incorrigible kids, and other sins... sigh

so why pick out this one sin for any more special attention then the others, other then your personal reactions. God loves all sinners the same....

debjm

I agree, sin is sin.

But the issue with this sin, is that the world wants Christians to adopt their perspective on homosexuality and stop us from identifying it as a sin.

So much so, that you can be breaking the law in Europe for maintaining that moral position.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion...y-is-a-sin.html

http://chalcedon.edu/Research/Articles/S...-Homosexuality/

Do you know any other moral standard that the world is doing that with?

Hence it lends itself appropriately to this discussion on Gods absolute moral standards.

[Woody]

Quote:

spread hate speech. .....I don't know how to make that any clearer to you....

My thoughts exactly

[Twilight II]

Quote:

You claimed God does not view homosexuality as an abomination.

Ok, so how come when I say that the concept of the "wrongness of homosexuality" did NOT make it to the top 10 Commandment?

If homosexuality was so bad, why didn't God mention it in the 10 Commandments? Instead, the only 'sexual reference" is about adultery...not homosexuality..why? I have to conclude that homosexuality is NOT that bad, even though listed as an "abomination"....Perhaps you ought to look up in the bible other things that were concidered to be "abominations"....."mixed marriages" "unjust weights" "Lying lips" are a few of the abominations that I found....Even being proud is an abomination...

What part of "abomination" do you not understand Neil?

Arguing it is not in the 10 commandments means that God wasn't all that serious is ludicrous, especially when we have the injuction not fo fornicate.

And if we accepted your argument then that means anything God commanded outside of those commandments is irrelevant.

Do you understand what you are saying?

And claiming God must agree with your view on homosexuality, because God is love and you are a bad person to disagree with the community that agrees with Neil is not a good argument to make...

Especially since I do not see you having the consensus of the "community".

It has not been stated here in any case that I can see...

[phkrause]

Can someone point out this aledged(sp) hate speech?

[M. T. Cross]

Quote:

1. If your gods are supplying a standard for "their" followers, then it is subjective, not absolute.

So you have no basis for absolute morality with this argument.

Absolute for their followers. Further more since they are all a part of the Divine - they all have those basic set of standards that are inherent to all things. Some deity add in some other standards that apparently they like or are important to them.

Quote:

2. Yes you have moral authority over your children, but is it absolute? No, the government can over ride your authority.

And the fact you have authority over your children only proves subjective morality, absolute morality would imply authority ove ALL children...

And the government can over ride biblical authority as well. So I guess your deities authority is not so absolute either - by your own argument.

Quote:

3. I am not demanding you adopt my worldview, I am simply stating that your worldview cannot make any sense of the world, because it does not account for the existance of absolute moral standards. Therefore it fails as a worldview to account for life and explain the purpose and existence of life.

Sure it can. With the exception of the Celtic worldview, each culture has a creation story.

Other than that I can go with evolution

Quote:

4. Yes you do have absolute moral standards, because you live in a universe created by God, that created the concept of absolute moral standards, that is not the issue. The issue is you cannot account for them in your own worldview.

We almost agree there. Except I say all things are a manifestation of the Divine (and at some point we could get into what that is) not your God. I don't think the Divine = Biblical God.

Quote:

5. Your worldview allows for many gods, but again it cannot explain the existance of transcendental laws.

Yes it does. They are the laws that bring all things from chaos into order.

Quote:

6. Your worldview demands the bible be just "any book". I recognise you assumption for what it is.

I also apply that viewpoint to anything I read. All books are written by humans, and without fail humans all have agendas that colour their actions, whether they can recognize these agendas or not.

Quote:

7. Without the Christian God, there is no accounting for the material universe and the laws of mind, that help us to measure that universe. Without the Christian God, there is just blind faith.

Oddly enough I would say that WITH the Christian God there is nothing but blind faith.

Quote:

8. I do not accept your idea that God is impersonal and part of us, but let us say that I did for a moment.

Upon what basis would you define what is right and wrong, if we are all equally god and define our own concepts of right and wrong?

Since I did not say that I am not really sure how to answer you.

[Woody]

twilight you would do well to do a word study on all the sins are are abominations to God,

and class this one sin you refer to with all those sins, and then perhaps you will discover the perspective others are sharing with you.

no one is asking you to deny anything biblical, only that you get the perspective on abominations to God across the board, then see a more balanced view.

if you lie it is an abomination

if you worship God with less then your whole heart it is an abomination

if you do business with dishonest measurements or scales it is an abomination... basically sin is an abomination to God across the board.

the death penalty was once given for kids that persisted in disobedience, and for gathering wood on Sabbath, so this places the abomination of homosexuality on even par with working on Sabbath and incorrigible kids, and other sins... sigh

so why pick out this one sin for any more special attention then the others, other then your personal reactions. God loves all sinners the same....

debjm

A BIG AMEN Well said.

[Woody]

Can someone point out this aledged(sp) hate speech?

No pk. If you haven't seen it ... you never will.

[Woody]

Good Job EmptyCross

[Neil D]

Quote:

You keep stating it is my "interpretation" Neil.

I have pointed you to the fact that God stated Homosexuality is an abomination to Him.

well, it is your interpretation....Not all people have the same level of insight as you do...Therefore, it is YOUR interpretation...you interpreted it last...and imposed it upon the community...some in the community oppose your interpretation, and are equal to your interpretation or have more schooling, and still disagree with you....yet you insist you are correct....What make you more correct than the 4 people who have been argueing with you???

And then argued that I am relying on interpretation and have no authority to do so.

[phkrause]

That's what I thought

[JoeMo]

Quote:

Our sinful nature is the problem, which problem God can solve.

A Christianity that does not solve the sin problem, is merely just any other religion. And that is a hopeless position.

Wow! If I were gay, that message would certainly give me hope - NOT!

I agree that God can (and has, in some cases) totally remove the desire for/inclination towards binding sins (not condemning anyone here - just using the term for sins from which people have a hard time overcoming).

But what do you tell committed Christian people who have struggled years and years with habitual (or genetic) "sin"? That they're gonna go to hell (uplifting and encouraging)? How about that their faith is weak and if they just "prayed harder and believed more", God would answer their prayers? Really? Do we have the divine authority to commit God to keep that promise? Or how about telling them that God is God; and His choice on who to help and who He doesn't help is up to Him (i.e., God is arbitrary and capricious).

How about just offering people support and acceptance, showing them that God loves them unconditionally just as they are?

Let the Holy Spirit do the changing (if any changing is needed) the way He chooses - not the way we choose.

[Twilight II]

Quote:

1. If your gods are supplying a standard for "their" followers, then it is subjective, not absolute.

So you have no basis for absolute morality with this argument.

Absolute for their followers. Further more since they are all a part of the Divine - they all have those basic set of standards that are inherent to all things. Some deity add in some other standards that apparently they like or are important to them.

Quote:

2. Yes you have moral authority over your children, but is it absolute? No, the government can over ride your authority.

And the fact you have authority over your children only proves subjective morality, absolute morality would imply authority ove ALL children...

And the government can over ride biblical authority as well. So I guess your deities authority is not so absolute either - by your own argument.

Quote:

3. I am not demanding you adopt my worldview, I am simply stating that your worldview cannot make any sense of the world, because it does not account for the existance of absolute moral standards. Therefore it fails as a worldview to account for life and explain the purpose and existence of life.

Sure it can. With the exception of the Celtic worldview, each culture has a creation story.

Other than that I can go with evolution

Quote:

4. Yes you do have absolute moral standards, because you live in a universe created by God, that created the concept of absolute moral standards, that is not the issue. The issue is you cannot account for them in your own worldview.

We almost agree there. Except I say all things are a manifestation of the Divine (and at some point we could get into what that is) not your God. I don't think the Divine = Biblical God.

Quote:

5. Your worldview allows for many gods, but again it cannot explain the existance of transcendental laws.

Yes it does. They are the laws that bring all things from chaos into order.

Quote:

6. Your worldview demands the bible be just "any book". I recognise you assumption for what it is.

I also apply that viewpoint to anything I read. All books are written by humans, and without fail humans all have agendas that colour their actions, whether they can recognize these agendas or not.

Quote:

7. Without the Christian God, there is no accounting for the material universe and the laws of mind, that help us to measure that universe. Without the Christian God, there is just blind faith.

Oddly enough I would say that WITH the Christian God there is nothing but blind faith.

Quote:

8. I do not accept your idea that God is impersonal and part of us, but let us say that I did for a moment.

Upon what basis would you define what is right and wrong, if we are all equally god and define our own concepts of right and wrong?

Since I did not say that I am not really sure how to answer you.

I think we should define what it means to have an Absolute Moral standard.

This is a standard that is true in all places, at all times, for everyone.

What you have been presenting does not fit this criteria, but fits the criteria of subjective morality, which is a standard that is not universal.

Once that definition has been accepted, I think you will see that you cannot account for Absolute Moral Standards in your worldview.

[Twilight II]

Can someone point out this aledged(sp) hate speech?

No they cannot.

It is a quite basic attempt to confuse the issue through ad hominem.

[Twilight II]

Quote:

You keep stating it is my "interpretation" Neil.

I have pointed you to the fact that God stated Homosexuality is an abomination to Him.

well, it is your interpretation....Not all people have the same level of insight as you do...Therefore, it is YOUR interpretation...you interpreted it last...and imposed it upon the community...some in the community oppose your interpretation, and are equal to your interpretation or have more schooling, and still disagree with you....yet you insist you are correct....What make you more correct than the 4 people who have been argueing with you???

Originally Posted By: Twilight II

And then argued that I am relying on interpretation and have no authority to do so.

....be.c.a.u.s.e ...you don't have the authority...?!?!?!? even though you keep insisting that you do.....???

Quote:

I am simply stating a biblical fact that anyone here, using reason and logic, can see is plain.

Apparently not everyone can see this "plain" fact...There are at least 4 people here who are well schooled, and don't understand what you are trying to get at, and when you do, come to the ruffly same conclusions that you have arrived at...

Quote:

Lev 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it [is] abomination.

You are denying this simple fact and claiming it is my interpretation.

And that I should not present this view.

Noooo, I am saying that by presenting this viewpoint in attracting homosexuals to Christ, you violate the other principles of the bible in regard to attracting people to Christ...or by being a good ambassador to Christ, or by being a good friend of Christ or of violating the principles of drawing people to Christ thru the heart...Anytime someone insults another, and claims that they are being friendly, I think the bible calls that an abomination....

Quote:

It is your pre-supposition that is the problem, you will not allow the bible to have authority in this issue, so you want to make it a fault with my character.

OOOrr, maybe it's because I will not allow your single assertion to go unchallenged with the many other principles the bible also brings forth....

Quote:

So unless you can justify your rejection of this verse, your continued ad hominem serves no purpose other than to reveal you have no basis for your argument.

I did not reject the verse...I gave plenty of reasons as to why it should not be used alone as some sort of 'attractant' for Christ...You put more words in my mouth that were never there.....why do you do this???

And if I am going to be accused of straw-men arguments, let me at least make them before you claim that they are there....At least, give me a chance to say something 'straw-man-ish" in some arguements....

So basically your argument is that if we point out sin, we alienate sinners...

So we shouldn't point out sin.

And because a few people here agree with you, you are absolutely right...

[Twilight II]

Quote:

Our sinful nature is the problem, which problem God can solve.

A Christianity that does not solve the sin problem, is merely just any other religion. And that is a hopeless position.

Wow! If I were gay, that message would certainly give me hope - NOT!

I agree that God can (and has, in some cases) totally remove the desire for/inclination towards binding sins (not condemning anyone here - just using the term for sins from which people have a hard time overcoming).

But what do you tell committed Christian people who have struggled years and years with habitual (or genetic) "sin"? That they're gonna go to hell (uplifting and encouraging)? How about that their faith is weak and if they just "prayed harder and believed more", God would answer their prayers? Really? Do we have the divine authority to commit God to keep that promise? Or how about telling them that God is God; and His choice on who to help and who He doesn't help is up to Him (i.e., God is arbitrary and capricious).

How about just offering people support and acceptance, showing them that God loves them unconditionally just as they are?

Let the Holy Spirit do the changing (if any changing is needed) the way He chooses - not the way we choose.

Why would you want to hug them in their sin, when you could help them to overcome their sin?

And why would that be loving?

Jesus didn't hug people and sympathise with their sin, He healed them...

[M. T. Cross]

I think we should define what it means to have an Absolute Moral standard.

This is a standard that is true in all places, at all times, for everyone.

What you have been presenting does not fit this criteria, but fits the criteria of subjective morality, which is a standard that is not universal.

Once that definition has been accepted, I think you will see that you cannot account for Absolute Moral Standards in your worldview.

I believe I did in my answer to #1.

Further more since they are all a part of the Divine - they all have those basic set of standards that are inherent to all things.

[Neil D]

Quote:

What part of "abomination" do you not understand Neil?

Oh, now you want to shift gears and focus on me, when it is you who are making the claim that homosexuality is an supreme abomination and the community must enforce penalties for those who practice such things....

Arguing it is not in the 10 commandments means that God wasn't all that serious is ludicrous, especially when we have the injuction not fo fornicate.

[Twilight II]

It is interesting how we can make homosexuality as special class of sin.

And homosexuals a special class of people.

That God cannot help...

Homosexuals are not "special", they are not "different", they have the same problem as all of us.

They are born with a sinful nature.

God does not walk away from the homosexual because that sin is too tough for Him...

Yet some here would intimate that this is the case, that God cannot heal them.

I am born with the propensity to steal, lie, kill and fornicate.

As is everyone else in the world.

Yet, do I argue that because I am born that way, I should get special treatment, or that my problems are too difficult for God?

If we accept that argument, that is where it goes.

Some sinners and some sins are just too tough for God...

Really?

[Twilight II]

Originally Posted By: Twilight II

I think we should define what it means to have an Absolute Moral standard.

This is a standard that is true in all places, at all times, for everyone.

What you have been presenting does not fit this criteria, but fits the criteria of subjective morality, which is a standard that is not universal.

Once that definition has been accepted, I think you will see that you cannot account for Absolute Moral Standards in your worldview.

I believe I did in my answer to #1.

Further more since they are all a part of the Divine - they all have those basic set of standards that are inherent to all things.

Okay, so this "divine" is the source of all absolute moral standards.

So what is this "divine", please qualify it for me.

[Neil D]

So basically your argument is that if we point out sin, we alienate sinners...

So we shouldn't point out sin.

And because a few people here agree with you, you are absolutely right...

I didn't say that either...There you go again, putting words into my mouth...

I think someone else, [JoeMoe] said it best...read what he has to say...after all, he does have my Calvin image as an icon...since he does have good taste in Icons, he must have a fairly good response to an assurtion or two of yours...

[Woody]

Quote:

Why would you want to hug them in their sin, when you could help them to overcome their sin?

If what you are doing ... is considered help - WOW !!!

[Twilight II]

Oh, now you want to shift gears and focus on me, when it is you who are making the claim that homosexuality is an supreme abomination and the community must enforce penalties for those who practice such things....

[JoeMo]

Quote:

what you have done here, is ask me to abandon the basis of my worldview and instead adopt empiricism as the foundation of my beliefs.

Exactly - what's wrong with asking someone to abandon (or at least reconsider) their world view? How else will we ever learn anything worth learning if we are not willing to learn the reasons why we should (or shouldn't) believe what we believe? When Christian evangelists go to places where no one has ever even heard of Jesus, isn't that exactly what we are asking others to do (abandon their own worldview)? or is that something completely different?