• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

The GOD Thread~

AphroditeGoneAwry

failure to thrive
Joined
Feb 20, 2009
Messages
5,585
MBTI Type
INfj
Enneagram
451
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Yeah, ancient greek men used to have sex with boys at parties... They were without christianity. Hmm... I wonder if that was before the birth of christ? assuming they didn't have an opportunity to meet christ.

It was before. Male (and female) prostitutes existed in the Gentile culture long before Jesus. They were especially active at the 'high places' where rituals were performed to Baal and Asherah.
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
The Truth about homosexuality, and hypersexuality, and asexuality seems to point in the direction of nurture, not nature. But that does not mean one cannot choose to live how one decides to. As I said God is COMPLETELY TOLERANT OF OUR CHOICES. Jesus is too. They are both gentlemen. That does not mean that you won't face Him someday and have to explain your choices, but if He allows you to choose, who are mere humans to tell you that you cannot?

Having said that, Christians have a responsibility to 'rebuke' their brethren when they see them committing sin (as homosexuality and sexual immorality is sin), but then to step back and leave them alone.

I think you most definitely have a sound basis for your desire to bond with men to stem from your lack of bonding with a consistent male role model, especially in your formative years. Playing with certain toys makes little difference ultimately in one's psychosocial and sexual well-being. A boy can love pink, love dress-up, love his fingernails painted, love girl toys, but still turn out being a boy, and able to love the woman God made for him.

My personal view on homosexuality is that, like all other forms of sin, homosexuals choose to not hold faith in god's love, and thus seek it in ways that they can artificually create. When man seeks to empower himself without god, he turns to sin. When man seeks to empower himself through a force more powerful than himself, he turns away from sin and seeks the holy spirit. Only with love can a man bring another man out of his own self made hell.

My point is that having a link between gay men (or women) does not likely mean they were born being gay. Though it does mean that switch is probably more likely to be flipped with the 'right' or wrong, environment.

Meaning, some men need to bond more than others with their male counterparts. If those guys don't have a male role model or loving figure, it makes sense that they will be more likely to need to seek it out.

to be more precise, I believe each personality can have its own reason for turning gay. I don't know what that is but I'm certain its there. If I were to turn gay it would probably be because I lost hope in females and looked for someone just as desperate as myself for love. But I'm sure other personalities may have their reasons.

I guess it does seem possible that nurture does have some role in homosexuality but personally I think it likely that genetics has a lot more do do with it than anything else. I recall always liking girls - from the time I was 5 - which is as far back as I can remember. Was that because of how I was raised as a small child? I doubt it.

All relationships are dysfunctional in some way. It's just a matter of degree. No parent is perfect, dysfunctional behaviors that are passed down from generation to generation and there are plain personality differences that exist between parent and child. It would be nice if it were not like that I suppose but it just is.

I have read the references in the Old Testament about homosexuality as well as the references in the New Testament that refer to those Old Testament concepts. Jesus actually never said homosexuality was a sin. Other people did though. For example, there is this:

Leviticus 18:22 “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.”

But then there are also these things.

Leviticus 11:4 “Nevertheless these shall ye not eat of them that chew the cud, or of them that divide the hoof: as the camel, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.”

Leviticus 11:10 “And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you.”

Leviticus 11:27 “And whatsoever goeth upon his paws, among all manner of beasts that go on all four, those are unclean unto you: whoso toucheth their carcase shall be unclean until the even.”

Leviticus 11:28–29 “These also shall be unclean unto you among the creeping things that creep upon the earth; the weasel, and the mouse, and the tortoise after his kind, and the ferret, and the chameleon, and the lizard, and the snail, and the mole.”

Leviticus 11:13–20 “These are they which ye shall have in abomination among the fowls; they shall not be eaten, they are an abomination: the eagle, and the ossifrage, and the osprey, and the vulture, and the kite after his kind; every raven after his kind; and the owl, and the night hawk, and the cuckow, and the hawk after his kind, and the little owl, and the cormorant, and the great owl, and the swan, and the pelican, and the gier eagle, and the stork, the heron after her kind, and the lapwing, and the bat. All fowls that creep, going upon all four, shall be an abomination unto you.”

Leviticus 10:6 “Uncover not your heads, neither rend your clothes; lest ye die, and lest wrath come upon all the people.”

Leviticus 19:19 “Neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee.”

Leviticus 19:27 “Neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard.”

Leviticus 19:19 “Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind.”

Leviticus 5:2 “If a soul touch any unclean thing, whether it be a carcase of an unclean beast, or a carcase of unclean cattle, or the carcase of unclean creeping things, and if it be hidden from him; he also shall be unclean, and guilty.”

Leviticus 12:4–5 “And she shall then continue in the blood of her purifying three and thirty days; she shall touch no hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying be fulfilled. But if she bear a maid child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her separation: and she shall continue in the blood of her purifying threescore and six days.”
 

prplchknz

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Messages
34,397
MBTI Type
yupp
wait so if people know what they like 5 or younger, what does it mean if you didn't know until after you were 18?
 

AphroditeGoneAwry

failure to thrive
Joined
Feb 20, 2009
Messages
5,585
MBTI Type
INfj
Enneagram
451
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I guess it does seem possible that nurture does have some role in homosexuality but personally I think it likely that genetics has a lot more do do with it than anything else. I recall always liking girls - from the time I was 5 - which is as far back as I can remember. Was that because of how I was raised as a small child? I doubt it.

All relationships are dysfunctional in some way. It's just a matter of degree. No parent is perfect, dysfunctional behaviors that are passed down from generation to generation and there are plain personality differences that exist between parent and child. It would be nice if it were not like that I suppose but it just is.

I have read the references in the Old Testament about homosexuality as well as the references in the New Testament that refer to those Old Testament concepts. Jesus actually never said homosexuality was a sin. Other people did though. For example, there is this:

Leviticus 18:22 “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.”

But then there are also these things.

Leviticus 11:4 “Nevertheless these shall ye not eat of them that chew the cud, or of them that divide the hoof: as the camel, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.”

Leviticus 11:10 “And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you.”

Leviticus 11:27 “And whatsoever goeth upon his paws, among all manner of beasts that go on all four, those are unclean unto you: whoso toucheth their carcase shall be unclean until the even.”

Leviticus 11:28–29 “These also shall be unclean unto you among the creeping things that creep upon the earth; the weasel, and the mouse, and the tortoise after his kind, and the ferret, and the chameleon, and the lizard, and the snail, and the mole.”

Leviticus 11:13–20 “These are they which ye shall have in abomination among the fowls; they shall not be eaten, they are an abomination: the eagle, and the ossifrage, and the osprey, and the vulture, and the kite after his kind; every raven after his kind; and the owl, and the night hawk, and the cuckow, and the hawk after his kind, and the little owl, and the cormorant, and the great owl, and the swan, and the pelican, and the gier eagle, and the stork, the heron after her kind, and the lapwing, and the bat. All fowls that creep, going upon all four, shall be an abomination unto you.”

Leviticus 10:6 “Uncover not your heads, neither rend your clothes; lest ye die, and lest wrath come upon all the people.”

Leviticus 19:19 “Neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee.”

Leviticus 19:27 “Neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard.”

Leviticus 19:19 “Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind.”

Leviticus 5:2 “If a soul touch any unclean thing, whether it be a carcase of an unclean beast, or a carcase of unclean cattle, or the carcase of unclean creeping things, and if it be hidden from him; he also shall be unclean, and guilty.”

Leviticus 12:4–5 “And she shall then continue in the blood of her purifying three and thirty days; she shall touch no hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying be fulfilled. But if she bear a maid child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her separation: and she shall continue in the blood of her purifying threescore and six days.”


I love Leviticus.
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I love Leviticus.

Do you think some of those things I just listed are a little ridiculous though?

So for example - I wore a wool sweater yesterday. That apparently is a sin.

I assure you though it was only the finest quality wool.

Then there was the sushi I had the day before and the escargot that I had the month before that...
 

Octavarium

New member
Joined
Jan 27, 2014
Messages
71
It might just mean that there is an area in the brain of those people that needs a strong attachment to a person of the same gender. i.e. those people are affected MORE not having that nurturing same-sex parent relationship than others. And so if that attachment does not come from the father or consistent male role model, then those people are going to be more likely to feel driven to get that need met in a sexual loving way. Whereas another male (or female) who didn't bond, and who doesn't have that area activated in the brain, is able to go on without intensely desiring a relationship with a person of the same gender.

Do you have any support for your claim that people who didn't have a strong bond with their same sex parent are more likely to be gay?

Either way, we've established that each person's sexual orientation is caused by factors outside their control; it's at least partially genetic, and even if your bonding theory is correct, we don't get to choose whether we have loving parents. That means no one can be held responsible for which gender(s) they find sexually attractive. We can be held responsible for choosing to act on our desires, but if you believe that 1) God is omnibenevolent, and 2) God considers homosexuality to be a sin, why would you also believe that God created a system in which, through no fault of their own, some people are more tempted to sin than others?
 

prplchknz

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Messages
34,397
MBTI Type
yupp
Do you have any support for your claim that people who didn't have a strong bond with their same sex parent are more likely to be gay?

?
According to this, I should be bi. I have a strong bond with both my parents.
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I guess my point is that there are enough things that we do every day that are actually really sinful and that we can exert some control over rather than to to focus on those things that we are born with.

The common thing about sin is that it tends to harm others. Being gay doesn't harm anyone.
 

Octavarium

New member
Joined
Jan 27, 2014
Messages
71
According to this, I should be bi. I have a strong bond with both my parents.

I don't think [MENTION=6336]AphroditeGoneAwry[/MENTION] was saying that people who have a strong bond with both their parents will be bi, just that homosexuals are people who have a particularly strong need to bond with their same sex parent, but don't have that bond. Anyway, in case you were asking me, I'm not endorsing that theory; just pointing out its implications.
 

prplchknz

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Messages
34,397
MBTI Type
yupp
I don't think [MENTION=6336]AphroditeGoneAwry[/MENTION] was saying that people who have a strong bond with both their parents will be bi, just that homosexuals are people who have a particularly strong need to bond with their same sex parent, but don't have that bond. Anyway, in case you were asking me, I'm not endorsing that theory; just pointing out its implications.

I know you're not, I'm just saying it's a flaw theory
 

RaptorWizard

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
5,895
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Infinities-Omega gives Wish
The World has a Princess
Her Prophet is Poimandres
Heaven Wills the Force of All
The Ultimate Mastermind is One
Our Destinies shine the Rainbow
Creation Exists as God’s Light
 

RaptorWizard

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
5,895
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I know you're not, I'm just saying it's a flaw theory

Together Infinities forge Futures
The Super-Nexus programs Existence
Mastermind of Everything Speaks
Poimandres the Dragon Envisions
The Goddess Wills All Heavens
Prophet of Force fulfills Destiny
His Story will be Forever One.
 

AphroditeGoneAwry

failure to thrive
Joined
Feb 20, 2009
Messages
5,585
MBTI Type
INfj
Enneagram
451
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Do you think some of those things I just listed are a little ridiculous though?

So for example - I wore a wool sweater yesterday. That apparently is a sin.

I assure you though it was only the finest quality wool.

Then there was the sushi I had the day before and the escargot that I had the month before that...

I have reverence for all the Law through the Prophets. Jesus did as well, and commanded that we keep all the Law, and that he came to fulfill it, not abolish it. It was the early Christian church leaders in the first centuries after The Crucifixion that decided the Gentiles needed a watered-down easier version to follow, and hence we have our modern day Christian roots, stemming from pagan-Christianity, versus Jewish-Christianity.

Anyway, the Law is quite inspired and amazingly beneficial. I have become Kosher myself because the Law speaks about not eating things that are not really healthy for us, like pork and bottom-dwelling seafood. It speaks about not eating fat and blood because those are sacred gifts for God. We know animal fat is unhealthy for us as well! Some things Jesus changed, like stoning adulterers, and divorce, but overall the Law still stands as a wonderful guidebook for our lives! Better than science and psychology can give us! I looked up the bit about mixing linen and wool and this is what I found:

According to modern biblical scholars, the rules against these mixtures are survivals of the clothing of the ancient Jewish temple and that these mixtures were considered to be holy and/or were forfeited to a sanctuary.[2] It may also be observed that linen is a product of a riverine agricultural economy, such as that of the Nile Valley, while wool is a product of a desert, pastoral economy, such as that of the Hebrew tribes. Mixing the two together symbolically mixes Egypt and the Hebrews. It also violates a more general aversion to the mixing of categories found in the Leviticus holiness code, as suggested by anthropologists such as Mary Douglas.

I find so much inherent wisdom in the Law, and I know it's divinely inspired because these things were written down over 3,000 years ago!! It is unlikely man was able to know all these things on his own.

Jesus did put the Law in the proper perspective though. He said it's not so much what goes in your mouth, as what comes out of it that defiles you. He also said to do as the Law says, but not necessarily as the Jews do, for they don't keep the Law very well. Point is, if you follow the Great Commandments "Love God with all your heart, soul, and might" and "Love you neighbor as yourself", that is the essence of Christ's teaching. However, the Law is specific for us so that we might not waver and therefore go astray. It is VERY easy to go astray from God and His Word. The Mitzvot (commandments) are our friends to help us stay obedient to God. They should be viewed with thankfulness to God for making it so clear for us to be holy and righteous.

Do you have any support for your claim that people who didn't have a strong bond with their same sex parent are more likely to be gay?

Stacey Dooley did a show on gay conversion therapy, and in it she interviewed a psychiatrist/psychologist who had this theory. It resonated with what I know to be true as well.

Either way, we've established that each person's sexual orientation is caused by factors outside their control; it's at least partially genetic, and even if your bonding theory is correct, we don't get to choose whether we have loving parents. That means no one can be held responsible for which gender(s) they find sexually attractive. We can be held responsible for choosing to act on our desires, but if you believe that 1) God is omnibenevolent, and 2) God considers homosexuality to be a sin, why would you also believe that God created a system in which, through no fault of their own, some people are more tempted to sin than others?

But if you are a man attracted to men, you now know there is an underlying unmet bonding need. Instead of trying to meet that through sinful behavior that will not even meet your real needs that were unmet in childhood, a person could seek counseling to discuss the pent-up feelings and emotions surrounding not having a good relationship with that parent, and all that entails: rejection, abandonment, abuse, etc.

I'd suggest this person is not fit for a romantic relationship until he/she explores these issues in depth. Or at least is honest with their partner with the course of their therapy. Then as these feelings are worked through, the person can then explore the idea of relating with a person of the opposite sex.

I did not say God disallowed this, only that it's unlikely a person will live up to his/her full potential not living as God intended. God made male psychology and physiology to fit perfectly with a woman, and vice versa. He also made a Divine partner for every man--a woman who actually is made of part of that man! So if that man or woman chooses to live a gay lifestyle, he or she is also likely abandoning their ideal Godly partner. This, to me, is a travesty. :(

The common thing about sin is that it tends to harm others. Being gay doesn't harm anyone.

Sin is an offense against God. Yes, it might harm others, but the point is that it is against God. It's not up to us to interpret the Law to fit our desires. That defeats the purpose. Though many do, the righteous live to please God, their Creator and Master.

Infinities-Omega gives Wish
The World has a Princess
Her Prophet is Poimandres
Heaven Wills the Force of All
The Ultimate Mastermind is One
Our Destinies shine the Rainbow
Creation Exists as God’s Light

I like it.
 

Beorn

Permabanned
Joined
Dec 10, 2008
Messages
5,005
Do you think some of those things I just listed are a little ridiculous though?

So for example - I wore a wool sweater yesterday. That apparently is a sin.

I assure you though it was only the finest quality wool.

Then there was the sushi I had the day before and the escargot that I had the month before that...


:doh:

If your standard for exegesis and means of understanding the Bible is just by determining what seems silly to you and what doesn't then I'm not there's much point in arguing with you, but I'll give it a try.

Are you part of the nation of Israel???

If not then those laws don't apply to you. It's as simple as that. The laws in leviticus were maintained for a variety of reasons. They were inclusive of the natural law which pertains to everyone, but went beyond that to include laws that only pertained to israelites. Distinguishing between the natural law present in leviticus and laws specific to Israel really isn't difficult. Especially in this case.

God never condemned and destroyed a foreign nation because they ate shrimp. He did condemn and destroy people for pursuing unnatural desires.
 

AphroditeGoneAwry

failure to thrive
Joined
Feb 20, 2009
Messages
5,585
MBTI Type
INfj
Enneagram
451
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
:doh:

If your standard for exegesis and means of understanding the Bible is just by determining what seems silly to you and what doesn't then I'm not there's much point in arguing with you, but I'll give it a try.

Are you part of the nation of Israel???

If not then those laws don't apply to you. It's as simple as that. The laws in leviticus were maintained for a variety of reasons. They were inclusive of the natural law which pertains to everyone, but went beyond that to include laws that only pertained to israelites. Distinguishing between the natural law present in leviticus and laws specific to Israel really isn't difficult. Especially in this case.

God never condemned and destroyed a foreign nation because they ate shrimp. He did condemn and destroy people for pursuing unnatural desires.

They apply to you if you are a Jewish-Christian, but not if you are a Pagan-Christian. You are either one or the other. God the Father came before Christ. Unless you ignore the OT and the history of the faith of Christianity.
 

Beorn

Permabanned
Joined
Dec 10, 2008
Messages
5,005
They apply to you if you are a Jewish-Christian, but not if you are a Pagan-Christian. You are either one or the other. God the Father came before Christ. Unless you ignore the OT and the history of the faith of Christianity.

No. It doesn't matter whether you're jew or gentile. The temple was destroyed in the first century and so was the nation of Israel and all the laws that went with it.
 
Top