Does God consider homosexuality a sin

twistwoods · Post by **twistwoods** » Sat Aug 30, 2008 4:55 pm

Hoss;968056 wrote: [QUOTE=twistwoods;968050]

Twistwood,

I see no difference in what you said above and what you said earlier. There is a flaw in your thought pattern here, God is perfect, and he makes no mistakes. Itâ€™s an overriding principle of his character. So if man is sinning it isnâ€™t Gods 'fault' of creation. Itâ€™s manâ€™s fault of choice.

God absolutely did not in any way shape or form create someone with an instinct for same sex activity. It is a deviant learned behavior based on the hardness of mans heart that is naturally contrary to health and life. It is completely impossible for God to go against his own character and attributes, he makes no mistakes. It is not judging, it is a simple fact of life. I am not condemning anyone either, they make their choice; they condemn themselves by rejecting God. If someone who is a practicing homosexual sees God and starts to believe he will be changed in their minds when the Holy Spirit inters into them and they have the mind of Christ, God will slowly build up the truth in them and they will eventually reject the lie they have believed.

What you have said twice now is that God created men and women as homosexuals without choice to change their sinful ways. Thatâ€™s just not possible.

Once again you have failed to understand what I am saying and I am beginning to think it is deliberate.

I agree that God does not make mistakes but, like it or not, God did make gay people as well as straight people. And, if that is true, and we know God does not make mistakes, then we have to face the fact that he must have intended to make them. And if God intended to make them and God is too perfect to tolerate sin, we have to question whether homosexuality is in fact a sin. It is possible that the writers of the Bible were not told by God that homosexuality was sinful but, because it was not the way they expected men and women to behave, they assumed it was a sin. I am not saying this is definitely so, I am saying that it is a possibility - a possibility you will not even consider because you have closed your mind. I think that even if God appeared to you and told you that you were mistaken, you still could not open your mind to that possibility!

As to the so-called 'fact' that homosexuality is a learned behaviour, all the recent evidence proves that, in the vast majority of cases, that is not true. Also, as a former teacher, I have seen some very small boys (aged about 5 or 6) playing in the playground and I have noticed that, even at that young age, some of them seem much more effeminate than the other boys and I have suspected that they will be gay when they are older. If this is so, where did they 'learn' this behaviour? Are you saying that all those boys were sexually abused and so that was how they 'learnt' this behaviour? Surely not! I will never believe that!

But if you are saying that, then surely they are more sinned against than sinning and deserve our sympathy and understanding, rather than our condemnation.

However, some time ago I said that I was not going to take any more part in this thread because I did not really approve of it but, in my futile attempt to provoke people to move away from this topic, I have allowed myself to be sucked back into it. It is entirely my own fault - no one else's.

Nevertheless, I really do not want to continue with it. It is pointless. You - and others who are taking part in this thread (including the more strident gay people) - are so adamant in your belief that you alone know the truth, that you have closed your minds to any other possibility. Given that fact, I think I am wasting my time even trying to persuade you to consider that you just might be wrong, so I think I'll go away for a while and try to recharge my batteries by talking to people with more open minds.

Of course, you never know, I might feel better after a good night's sleep because it is already almost 1.00am here and I am really very tired. So, for now, all I will say is: Good night and God bless.

twistwoods · Post by **twistwoods** » Sat Aug 30, 2008 5:08 pm

Ted;968086 wrote: twistedwoods:-6

Excellent posts. Right on. God did create everything and since apparently He does not make mistakes than he also created homosexuality.

This whole thing emerges as a result of the heresy of the reformation-inerrancy.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Alleluia! Praise the Lord! God has sent me someone who understands what I am trying to say - but why did he have to wait until I was exhausted?!?

By the way, I hope you don't mind if I correct you about a very minor point - my name. I don't care too much what people call me because you would not believe some of the names I have been called in the past (most of them fairly abusive). Even so, I should point out that the name I use on the Internet is twistwoods - not twistedwoods. The truth is that it is a mixture of my maiden name and my married name. My maiden name was Entwistle and my married name is Woods - hence 'twistwoods'.

God bless.

twistwoods · Post by **twistwoods** » Sat Aug 30, 2008 5:16 pm

Hoss;968117 wrote: [QUOTE=twistwoods;968108]

I suppose you are right, after so many times of going back and forth it is pointless to rehash our differences. I cannot be persuaded away from truth. When my spirit bears witness with the Spirit of God that I agree with the scriptures nothing else will sway me. But take consolation in the fact that I do agree with you that itâ€™s made too much of in general life. But thatâ€™s not really the fault of the Christians, the homosexuals in defiance of Christianity flaunt their sin before us regularly, itâ€™s all over the news media. Itâ€™s not really the Christians who bring the subject up, itâ€™s the homosexual. I think the Christians just respond to it.

One final word - well, I am a woman - and you know we like to have the last word!:wah:

I sincerely hope that, even if we cannot agree about this subject - and I know we never will - I hope we can at least part as friends.

God bless.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:11 pm

twistwoods:-6

Sorry about that. I am visually impaired and should have looked more closely.

I guess some people simply don't want to think. They've made up their minds so don't confuse them with the facts.

Now that you are exhausted I can say it was just a test. LOL.

Welcome. I do hope you enjoy your stay in the garden.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:15 pm

twistwoods:-6

Actually you will find a decent lot of folks here; everything from atheist through to very right wing. Sometimes it get a little heated but we are all friends. A great bunch. Generally not boring.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:33 pm

twistwoods;967999 wrote: I didn't come wading in full of complaints and it is not true that I did not contribute a syllable.
I was referring only to this thread, in which you did indeed come wading in full of complaints and disparaging remarks of your own, not having contributing one syllable yourself - in this thread. But, the point is either made or missed.

Welcome, and let's move forward. :-6

twistwoods · Post by **twistwoods** » Sun Aug 31, 2008 8:00 am

Accountable;968212 wrote: I was referring only to this thread, in which you did indeed come wading in full of complaints and disparaging remarks of your own, not having contributing one syllable yourself - in this thread. But, the point is either made or missed.

Welcome, and let's move forward. :-6

I think that if you check back a few weeks you will find that I did not do what you are saying. I joined in the thread and very respectfully put my own arguments. Still, as you say, it is time to move on.

God bless.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Aug 31, 2008 11:42 am

twistwoods;942897 wrote: *snip*

I AM STRAIGHT BUT NOT NARROW!
oops

:-3 NOTHING TO SEE HERE! LET'S MOVE ALONG.

AussiePam · Post by **AussiePam** » Sun Aug 31, 2008 1:59 pm

Before you all move on - can I ask a question, sort of humbly on behalf of the rest of us normal flawed humans who tremble a little when contemplating the Divine and don't quite feel confident that we fully and completely know the mind of God?

Is the answer to the thread title a yes or a no?

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 4:08 pm

In answer to the orignal question I would say "no". I don't think God gives a care about one's sexuality as long as it is not interfering negatively with the lives of others. There are far more important things in this world to be concerned about.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Odie · Post by **Odie** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 6:30 pm

Hoss;968793 wrote: The answer is a very simple 'yes'.

thankyou...............now can we move on?

AussiePam · Post by **AussiePam** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 8:34 pm

Thankyou Hoss and Ted!! So it's a yes and a no. Maybe it's something God is in two minds about, or else it's just not a very high issue on the Divine agenda. Anyway, it does show me that, when humans feel enlightened enough to pontificate on the mind of God, they do come up with different answers. Maybe it's like opposing armies / regimes / countries all having God on their side, as the old song went. I'll leave you all to it now, but again, thank you.

Odie · Post by **Odie** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 9:21 pm

guess they really won't know until they get there!:-5

AussiePam · Post by **AussiePam** » Tue Sep 02, 2008 2:27 am

Thanks Hoss - I hear you about people twisting things to suit their own agendas. I'm not homosexual, and have no particular agendas here. I'm also not a fundamentalist - and accept the Bible, but not all of it equally, and not all of it literally. The New Testament is a lot closer to us than some of the old Testament, and I think Jesus, who according to most scholars, combined human and Divine, was fairly gentle with sins of the flesh which were always considered of lesser importance than sins of the spirit like hubris (setting oneself up as an equal to God), envy and the bad kind of anger anger - which eat away at the very core of one's being. I've never understood why fundamentalist American Christians spend so much time on fulminating against homosexuality. I don't care much for it - but lack of love, lack of charity, lack of human warmth, smugness, self righteousness, the idea that one has all the answers ... worries me a whole heap more. There is so much we as humans just don't yet know.. and if you're going to quote Scripture, I think there's a bit about us all seeing through a glass darkly, but one day we'll know even as we're known. I guess, until then, I'll be careful about not judging.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Tue Sep 02, 2008 7:28 pm

Hoss:-6

The ancient word translated to "abomination" does not mean "sin". It means distasteful.

The word "sin" is rather difficult to be specific about. Some people think if one has a glass of wine it is a sin others do not. Some people think that to use a swear word is sin others do not.

When we keep trying to tell God what is a sin and what is not we are overstepping our bounds. We can neither define not describe God and ought to stay out of the attempt to do so.

The problem with the world is not sin. The problem is exclusivity in religions that forces people to fight against and judge each other. Once we get over this blatant nonsense the world will become a better and more peaceful place.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Tue Sep 02, 2008 7:54 pm

Hoss:-6

I does not mean "sin".

Lets pursue this a little further. Leviticus also says that we are not to wear clothing made of more than one fiber. That too is an abomination. Do you wear clothing of different fibers?

Shalom

Ted:-6

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Tue Sep 02, 2008 8:14 pm

Hoss:-6

From the Jewish Study Bible Pg 251 "Biblical and ancient Near Eastern culture was not familiar with homosexuality in the sense of a defined sexual orientation or lifestyle . . . It acknowledges only the occasional act of male ana intercourse, usually as an act of forced associated with humiliation, revenge, or subjection."

Clearly it is not a reference to consensual acts between to males.

Such an interpretation the claims all homosexual acts are an abomination fails to consider the times and thoughts of the time it was written. Yours is a judgment from the 21st Cent. but not from BCE.

It is interesting to check the Jewish encyclopedia to read about sexuality in ancient times. Adultery was only considered as such when a married man had sex with a married woman. It was quite acceptable for a married man to have sex with an unmarried non virgin. Polygamy was acceptable as can be noted in the stories of Saul and David. What some consider a sin was not a sin in the days the Bible was written.

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view. ... 5&letter=A

Watch that clothing; one fiber only. LOL

Shalom

Ted:-6

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Tue Sep 02, 2008 9:17 pm

Hoss:-6

Leviticus 19:19; Deut. 22:9-11.

Linked right in there with carnal knowledge.

Women are not to wear men's clothing either. Deut 22:5.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Tue Sep 02, 2008 9:27 pm

Hoss:-6

Read the Jewish Study Bible response in the above post. They had no concept of homosexuality as we do today. It was a reference to using anal intercourse to demean. It had nothing whatsoever to do with consensual sexual activity among loving committed people hetero or homosexual.

All the quotes in the world do not change that. It is a problem of trying to interpret the Bible on the basis of today's situation and era.

Parents were also to have recalcitrant children stoned at the city gate. Deut 24:14

Shalom

Ted:-6

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Tue Sep 02, 2008 9:35 pm

Hoss:-6

Now you are playing word games. Clearly Lev. 19:19 says you shall not wear clothing of two different fibers. That is a command. The word abomination isn't there. That's tough. It says don't. If God said don't and you do you are committing a sin or in your view an abomination since the two apparently are equal. You can't have it both ways.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Tue Sep 02, 2008 9:58 pm

Hoss:-6

Now let me get this straight you said that abomination=sin. Logically it means sin=abomination. Sin, it would appear is whatever God doesn't want us to do. Thus whether or not the word abomination is there it is all the same thing. I was not quoting. I did not put it in quotes.

Let's compute once more. Doing what God does not want us to do=sin=abomination. The logic is quite straightforward.

I most certainly have not wished God's damnation on you. That is not my role nor my desire. ("wait till he comes")

Shalom

Ted:-6

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Tue Sep 02, 2008 10:00 pm

Hoss:-6

What you believe is fine with me. However, I trust the folks who wrote the book more than others. LOL Reread the quote from the Jewish Study Bible.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Tue Sep 02, 2008 10:13 pm

Hoss:-6

No problem. I still disagree with you.

However let us look at your last quote. Jesus spent a good deal of his ministry associating with outcasts, sinners, publicans, tax collectors, prostitutes etc. I guess he hadn't read Paul or he might have learned he shouldn't have done that. LOL Apparently he came to save the lost but if he doesn't interact with them he can't and neither can we do much for them.

It seems to me the best rule is if one considers something a sin don't do it and leave the others up to God since He/She is the judge.

It is bed time here so I wish you a good evening and a restful sleep.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Wed Sep 03, 2008 4:10 pm

Hoss:-6

That was my point. Jesus was in the world but not of the world. Of course, one has to consider the meaning of the word "world" here. He is not speaking of the physical world, which is sacred but of the world of oppression and tyranny.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Wed Sep 03, 2008 4:34 pm

Some of the latest research on homosexuality.

http://www.geocities.com/WestHollywood/ ... earch.html

http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/neuro/n ... /Rana.html

http://books.google.ca/books?id=oGc9AAA ... lt#PPT1,M1

http://www.uoguelph.ca/atguelph/06-02-22/insight.shtml

Shalom

Ted:-6

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Fri Sep 05, 2008 6:50 pm

Hoss:-6

OK don't comment. It is of little concern to me. I do, however, find it rather interesting that many folks love and accept scientific discoveries when it suits them, such as medical advances, but when it doesn't suit them they they disregard it. Its kind of like wanting your cake and eating it too. Its also like having it both ways at the same time; somewhat illogical to say the least.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Fri Sep 05, 2008 7:04 pm

JAB:-6

Skepticism can also be lethal especially if one has a serious illness.

Though I do think that if God Himself/Herself told a fundamentalist that homsexuality was not wrong they would probably give Him/Her the cold shoulder. LOL

Shalom

Ted:-6

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Fri Sep 05, 2008 7:09 pm

Hoss:-6

"Merck's Medical Manual" the medical doctor's bible is quite clear that homosexuality is not a choice.

On you comment about medicine being an exact science why then is is called an "art"? 10 doctors, one patient, the same symptoms=10 different diagnoses?

I really don't want to be rude either but this demonstrates biblioatry.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Fri Sep 05, 2008 7:20 pm

Medical opinion.

http://www.7iber.com/blog/2008/06/22/ho ... l-opinion/

I do love this one. LOL

http://www.livescience.com/health/07032 ... ality.html

http://www.bio-medicine.org/medicine-ne ... s-22897-1/

Like I've said some would deny it even if God affirmed it. LOL

Shalom

Ted:-6