Homosexuality - a moral issue?

[M. T. Cross]

Again, you have placed your pre-supposition into the argument.

I can understand how as a pagan, you can think that the homosexual act is an expression of love etc.

But in my worldview, founded on the absolute moral standard of God as revealed in the Bible, the homosexual mindset (an aspect of the carnal mind) is considered abominable to God and therefore, as God is love, they cannot be acts of love.

I appreciate however in your worldview, you hold to the idea it is loving, but the question is then, does your worldview provide a basis for absolute morality?

Yes it does.

But then I am as bad of a pagan as I was a bad Christian.

[Woody]

Quote:

ignoring other principles that the bible espouses, sets himself up for hate speech...

Yes Exactly. It hurts my heart to see hate speech on a Christian site. What kind of a witness is all of this?

[Twilight II]

Originally Posted By: Twilight II

But here is the problem EmptyCross.

Because of your worldview, you have made these distinctions.

But my worldview, does not allow for any such distinction, because no such distinction is made in scripture.

Homosexuality is not a "special sin", it is just sin and part of humanities sinful nature.

So I cannot accept your argument based on this reasoning.

If you can show me this distinction you have made in the scripture I can consider it, as I am not aware of any such description, I have to reject your argument as one inconsistent with the stated position of God through His servants in the Bible.

And if I show you medical evidence?

What you have to understand, is that the Bible is the standard of my reasoning.

Without the Bible I have no basis to even consider and evaluate scientific reasoning.

It is only through the Bible that we can even rationally explain why we can perform any science.

So science always has to be subject to the Bible in my worldview.

Whereas 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.

Why would, or even should, I do that?

You are also mistaken because you think that I am arguing that it is not inherent in man.

Sin is inherent in man, so science would indeed not surprise me if it showed genetic reasons for homosexuality...

Where you have erred philosophically, is in assuming that I SHOULD step off the bible and use science as the basis of my knowledge of the universe...

[Twilight II]

Originally Posted By: Twilight II

So your position is that the Holy Spirit will never prompt someone to point out sin?

Where do you get that idea from?

I do not find it in the Bible.

But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you. John 14:26.....

It doesn't say that the Holy Spirit will teach someone else to tell where you messed up....

If that text was the only text on this subject, then you would have a point.

But we have many texts instructing us to point out sin, as born-again Christians.

I think you have pre-supposed your position on this matter and are trying to pull texts out of context to prove your point. :-)

[Neil D]

I appreciate however in your worldview, you hold to the idea it is loving, but the question is then, does your worldview provide a basis for absolute morality?

This question is sorta like wanting to be married to more than one woman.....How the heck can you take care of two, when one is more than enough for one man?

IOWs, why do you want me to provide a basis for absolute morality for another person when I have so much going on in my own life to take care of???? So, the answer to your question is "Yes, for me...but not for another"...

The reason for that is that the other person has different perspectives, and different definitions for morality. And again, the homosexuality issue is not a top 10 Commandment issue for the community...only for the individual and only under a relationship with Christ....

In fact, to speak for an absolute morality for the community is to set oneself up as God and to misrepresent Him to the community...that is wrong, and akin to the worst Sin, making oneself out to be God....

[Twilight II]

For starters there is no essence of paganism. THe amount of different pagan religions with completely different views is staggering.

Secondly, I spent the first 20 years of my life an SDA, and until I was 30 something I would have called myself a Christian. Much of what I say here is based on how I viewed things when I was a Christian - because that is the language spoken here.

Third - the statement you quoted is not based on any religious viewpoint. It is as a human being that thinks people should worry about getting their own lives in order and spend less time pointing out the flaws of others.

Upon what basis do you assert that human beings (apart from the Christian Worldview which you have rejected), should ascribe to your moral standard?

As a pagan, do you have a source for absolute moral standards?

[M. T. Cross]

Where you have erred philosophically, is in assuming that I SHOULD step off the bible and use science as the basis of my knowledge of the universe...

Actually no I have not.

In the end I really don't care if you personally accept homosexuality as a natural part of human make-up. If you are convinced by your beliefs it is a sin, more power to you.

What I am saying and where I am going with this goes back to your original reasoning in this thread.

What should a government base their opinions on. Since a government is there to represent ALL of their citizenry they can not base their law making on a biblical standard.

[Tom Wetmore]

Originally Posted By: Tom Wetmore

And that is absolutely not what I have said. Not here. Not ever.

God can. We can't. It doesn't happen now. It happens later. That is reality. To assure a gay person that God can change their very nature now, as many Christians do, is distorting the gospel and offering a false hope that destroys faith.

How do you convince a gay person to hang onto that future hope that "in a moment, in a twinkling of an eye" they will be changed, but only when Christ returns? How do you give them hope that a Christian life will help them now? How do they live a satisfying successful Christian life as someone gay by nature, right here, right now?

That is where I see no real answers from your POV. And that is the problem in a nutshell, IMHO.

Thank you for clarifying your position. :-)

Now let us consider your argument for a moment.

You are arguing that a homosexual should suppress their desires and live in denial to them, holding on until Jesus comes and changes those desires.

Whilst I argue that if a homosexual should confess those desires and ask God to remove them, experiencing freedom from guilt now.

Yet you claim that a homosexual living in torture and trying to live against his desires is somehow more hopeful than what I have presented.

So then I take your argument to its logical conclusion and I come back to the position that you say you reject.

Because God does not cleanse our sinful nature now, these sins are something we just have to supress until Jesus comes:

Homosexuality

Adultery

Lying

Stealing

Pride

Coveting

Etc

So God does not cleanse us from unrighteousness in any real sense until the second coming of Christ.

He just gives us the ability to suppress those desires (and be tortured by them).

How is that in any way more hopeful than having them removed by the Grace of God?

No sir, I reject your claims and place the charge fully back with you.

Your view does not supply hope, just tortured anguish for the sufferers life span...

Again with that assuming problem. You are the one that seems to have offered that solution. I asked. I didn't answer my own question. You supplied it from your own assumptions which really reflect your thinking on it, not mine.

I am asking you those questions. And your answer thus far does indeed seem to be that gay people must live with it until the second coming. I am asking, what is your solution.

You see, homosexuality is just the most obvious and intractable example of the sin problem we all face. We all live with defects, weaknesses to some degree or another. We all recognize that at the second coming that we will be changed. But what about now? I ask again, how do you convince a gay person that the Christian solution is worth waiting for, when they know very well that until then they must just live with it, suppressing this very fundamental part of their nature. How? Just answer the question without arguing.

[Twilight II]

Originally Posted By: Twilight II

You are a pagan, why would you want, as a pagan, to place your own morality on me?

And for the record please show where I have tried to place my own morality on you. I have not even stated any of my own morality in this thread.

When you state that you believe I should behave in a certain way, you are placing your absolute moral standards on me.

Whenever you state I am "wrong" about anything, you are applying a moral judgement upon my views and actions.

So unless you agree with everything I say, by default, you are presenting your own moral standard as a standard of absolute moral truth...

[Neil D]

If that text was the only text on this subject, then you would have a point.

But we have many texts instructing us to point out sin, as born-again Christians.

I think you have pre-supposed your position on this matter and are trying to pull texts out of context to prove your point. :-)

Ok, so, proof of the puddin'? Where are your texts? Mine is specific, and I expect yours to be specific...My text says that GOD HIMSELF will instruct....to the individual...not thru a person....Where is yours that show that God will instruct thru a person ? Notice, the word is "instruct", not tell...

[Twilight II]

Originally Posted By: Twilight II

So your position is that the Holy Spirit will never prompt someone to point out sin?

Where do you get that idea from?

I do not find it in the Bible.

How about this Scripture. Let's start out basic. "Judge not." "Remove the beam from your own eye." "He who is without sin can throw the first stone."

Or maybe EGW who most clearly said that pointing out others sins and faults is the work of the Accuser.

Unless you have the power and ability to do all the necessary curing of the disease you really shouldn't be the one to diagnose it.

What of the scripture that says "Judge righteous judgement" Tom?

You know enough to know that one deals with the heart and the other deals with the actions.

But let us say I take your argument to its logical conclusion.

You see a man with a shotgun rob a bank, in your argument it would be wrong to judge him as a thief...

Which of course you know is illogical, which then shows that your argument does not hold at all.

[M. T. Cross]

Originally Posted By: EmptyCross

For starters there is no essence of paganism. THe amount of different pagan religions with completely different views is staggering.

Secondly, I spent the first 20 years of my life an SDA, and until I was 30 something I would have called myself a Christian. Much of what I say here is based on how I viewed things when I was a Christian - because that is the language spoken here.

Third - the statement you quoted is not based on any religious viewpoint. It is as a human being that thinks people should worry about getting their own lives in order and spend less time pointing out the flaws of others.

Upon what basis do you assert that human beings (apart from the Christian Worldview which you have rejected), should ascribe to your moral standard?

As a pagan, do you have a source for absolute moral standards?

Much prayer and meditation with my Gods.

[Twilight II]

Originally Posted By: Twilight II

I appreciate however in your worldview, you hold to the idea it is loving, but the question is then, does your worldview provide a basis for absolute morality?

Yes it does.

But then I am as bad of a pagan as I was a bad Christian.

So what is your source, as a pagan, for absolute morality?

What "Authority" do you appeal to?

[Woody]

Quote:

If that text was the only text on this subject, then you would have a point.

Suggesting that scripture contradicts itself is dangerous ground. If read in proper context - I think you will see the error in your theories.

[Twilight II]

Quote:

ignoring other principles that the bible espouses, sets himself up for hate speech...

Yes Exactly. It hurts my heart to see hate speech on a Christian site. What kind of a witness is all of this?

Do you want to quote the "hate speech" you have taken issue with?

I am sure we would all like to address that.

[Woody]

Twilight - I see most of your posts as full of it.

[M. T. Cross]

You are a pagan, why would you want, as a pagan, to place your own morality on me?

[Woody]

Do you want to quote the "hate speech" you have taken issue with?

To give you an example -

Claiming someone is not a Christian - just because they disagree with your theories - is hate speech. And not only that - it us UN-Christian to make such a judgment. And I hate seeing it on this forum.

Don't blame me for bringing this up. You asked for an example. Trouble is - it permeates all through your posts.

[Twilight II]

So, the answer to your question is "Yes, for me...but not for another"...

In fact, to speak for an absolute morality for the community is to set oneself up as God and to misrepresent Him to the community...that is wrong, and akin to the worst Sin, making oneself out to be God....

2 points:

1. You have argued subjective moral standards as a basis for absolute morality, which is of course illogical.

2. You then state it is wrong to state an absolute moral standard for a community, whilst doing the very thing you are condemning, by setting a standard for the community.

[Neil D]

What of the scripture that says "Judge righteous judgement" Tom?

You know enough to know that one deals with the heart and the other deals with the actions.

But let us say I take your argument to its logical conclusion.

You see a man with a shotgun rob a bank, in your argument it would be wrong to judge him as a thief...

Which of course you know is illogical, which then shows that your argument does not hold at all.

Ok, let's try a different tact....

By evidence of your posts, you are trying to convince us that there is an absolute morality and it is ok to impose this upon the community. This is the evidence of your posts. I can say that you are trying to be a religious leader along the lines of Moses or EGW...Moses had the problem of messing up, "Must WE fetch water from this Rock!" was what he said to the children of Isreal when they were thirsting...as if Moses could bring water from the rock...and make himself to be as God...

And that is what you are trying to do...make yourself out to be as God, supplanting the Holy Spirit's principles of Him teaching us...

So, how do you like being God? How do you like being like Satan, craving the power of God?

for that is what you are trying to do.....

Now, having given that example, how do you feel about your calling a man with a gun into a bank a "thief" when you are trying to reckoncile him back to God?

[Twilight II]

Originally Posted By: Twilight II

Where you have erred philosophically, is in assuming that I SHOULD step off the bible and use science as the basis of my knowledge of the universe...

Actually no I have not.

In the end I really don't care if you personally accept homosexuality as a natural part of human make-up. If you are convinced by your beliefs it is a sin, more power to you.

What I am saying and where I am going with this goes back to your original reasoning in this thread.

What should a government base their opinions on. Since a government is there to represent ALL of their citizenry they can not base their law making on a biblical standard.

Just to clarify my position.

I accept the biblical position that man is born sinful, I do not disagree with you on this.

My question to you is, upon what basis do you establish absolute moral positions as a pagan?

[M. T. Cross]

And I answered that in a different post. I know this thread is moving as fast as most live chat rooms - but it is a couple of posts up

[Twilight II]

Again with that assuming problem. You are the one that seems to have offered that solution. I asked. I didn't answer my own question. You supplied it from your own assumptions which really reflect your thinking on it, not mine.

I am asking you those questions. And your answer thus far does indeed seem to be that gay people must live with it until the second coming. I am asking, what is your solution.

You see, homosexuality is just the most obvious and intractable example of the sin problem we all face. We all live with defects, weaknesses to some degree or another. We all recognize that at the second coming that we will be changed. But what about now? I ask again, how do you convince a gay person that the Christian solution is worth waiting for, when they know very well that until then they must just live with it, suppressing this very fundamental part of their nature. How? Just answer the question without arguing.

Until you clarify further, I can only assume from your posts that you believe we are bound by sin until Jesus comes.

I can only go on the information you provide, so if you are not happy with my conclusions then you should clarify your own position.

As to my solution, it is simple.

"Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God."

[Twilight II]

Originally Posted By: Twilight II

If that text was the only text on this subject, then you would have a point.

But we have many texts instructing us to point out sin, as born-again Christians.

I think you have pre-supposed your position on this matter and are trying to pull texts out of context to prove your point. :-)

Ok, so, proof of the puddin'? Where are your texts? Mine is specific, and I expect yours to be specific...My text says that GOD HIMSELF will instruct....to the individual...not thru a person....Where is yours that show that God will instruct thru a person ? Notice, the word is "instruct", not tell...

Does not Paul tell us to exhort and rebuke?

Does it not say in Ezekiel 3:21 the very thing you are denying we should do?

[Woody]

It's difficult to communicate when people twist scripture to their own biases. We need to take scripture in context.