Celtic Heroes

Lol!
You want to use science? Please do.
If homosexuality was natural Mr.evolution, then 2 homosexual individuals would be able to reproduce and have fertile offspring.
Is that the case?
Lemme help you with that: No.
As such, homosexuals as I said should "in theory" be eliminated by natural selection , but we have disrupted the cycle through genetic modifications due to plastics, pollution and even unaswerable unknown procedures.

How is homosexuality a sin? No where in the bible did it say it is a sin unless I'm blind and it is actually in the bible.

The bible says and I quote "if a man beds down with another man as he would a women they have done a horrible thing, and should be put to death"

Is Homosexuality a sin from a Biblical standpoint? Yes it is. This verse, and others, make it clear that homosexuality(now Im talking about humans; not trying to debate about plants/insects) is sin.

Do we still have to put people to death for it? No. That punishment was in the Old Testament Law. The Old Testament Law was a law for the nation of Israel. Just as America and England had laws, they had laws and this was one of them. Also, the Old Testament Law no longer had to be followed even for the Jews when Jesus died on the cross to save sinners. He took away the need for the Old Law. However, the New Law we as Christians were to follow had many of the same principles, but different consequences. We no longer had to put people to death for adultery or homosexuality. Now those particular descisions were up to the government(Note: I mean the decision of what the consequences were). Now if the guilty party was in the church, they were subject to church discipline(read about this in the New Testament if you don't know what it is).

Should we hate homosexuals? Of course not. The Bible never tells us to hate them and many times does it tell us to love our enemies, our neighbors(which it defines as everyone), our brothers, our family, etc.

Are there Christians(fake in many cases; real in others) who do hate homosexuals? Sadly, yes. There are definately churches who say that we should hate them. This is very annoying as it has given all Christians, even those who are not like that, a reputation as being bigoted. It is also sin as we are to love all people.

Initial Debate Question (For - Homosexuality is wrong; Against - Homosexuality is not wrong)
__________________________________________________________________________________________

What is your guys's standpoint on the Bible saying that you can't be homosexual?

__________________________________________________________________________________________

Argument 1: Against

Opinion-Controversial topic of homosexuality and the bible: Obviously the bible isn't written by just one person or by a more important factor, it IS NOT created by God. So, each and every one of us was created in the eyes of God. So if the bible is written from Christianity perspective then why would God create someone to be homosexual and then disapprove of this?

Summary: If God created us, why would He have homosexuality exist and condemn it?

Counter Argument 1: For

I believe homosexuality is just as sinful as any other sin. The Bible doesnt hold any sin higher than another (besides blasphemy). In Leviticus it says homosexuality is detestable. Thats pretty clear to me. I can find the reference if you would like.

Also, when God made Adam and Eve, man and woman, He said it was good. This to me means that God intended marriage to be between a man and a woman.

Also, in the New Testament Paul writes, "Do not even have a hint of sexual immorality." NOT EVEN A HINT. Not even a thought about sex that was other than God intended it to be.

Summary: The Bible states that "homosexuality is detestable". God intended marriage between a man and a woman, and thinking of sex which defies what God wanted is considered sinning.

Argument 2: Against

Why are there homosexual plants/animals? Did God decide only humans should be heterosexual but decided plants could be whatever they wanted?

Summary: Many species other than humans display homosexual behaviour. Why was there no mention of this in the Bible, and why do they exist in the first place?

Argument 3: Against

Homosexuality isn't an active choice that people take; thus, it should not be considered a sin, regardless of what the Bible says. If the Bible says that being short is a sin, then would you say that anyone born with medical dwarfism (such as Peter Dinklage) has sinned by simply existing? Do you think that the Bible should be everyone's moral compass?

Summary: A natural occurrence cannot be considered sinning.

Supportive Argument 3: Against

And then consider that you are condemning gays when they have no choice whatsoever in their sexual orientation, do you think someone likes being gay? Probs not. But threatening them for something they are born with is like threatening a black with slavery. Do you want to be THAT guy? No. Nobody wants to be THAT guy

Counter Argument 3: For

I will agree with you that some people can be born homosexual. But that still doesnt make it not a sin. Homosexuality is a sin and needs to be repented of just like any other sin. I am by no means a perfect person, I have sins I struggle with just like anyone else. But different people struggle with different sins, I struggle with things that a homosexual person might not struggle with, and vice versa. I have no basis to judge someones eternity, but God does. And from what He tells us, everyone has sinned and everyone deserves condemnation. But only through Jesus can we be saved and be with God forever.

Summary: Sinning is natural, therefore being born with a condition that the Bible classifies as wrong is still sinning.

Counter Argument 3: Against

Being born with a condition is not an act. If I was born with one leg, I didn't actually do something to not be able to run, it was a natural occurrence. The same way sinning is the act of disobedience against God's words, if people are born with homosexuality they didn't actually disobey anything. So no, with your definition, it does not make it a sin.

Summary: Sinning is defined as an act of disobedience. Being born with a condition is not acting, and cannot be considered as a sin.

Counter Argument 3: For

What I was saying is that even though people may be born homosexual, homosexuality is still a sin. Because we are born of sinful parents, that automatically makes us sinful too. You cant take two imperfect things and make something perfect. The Bible clearly says that ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. By nature we are all sinful. Just as we are human by nature.

Supported by: Romans 3:23
Summary: Humans are all sinful by nature, and must repent.

Supportive Argument 3: For

How is homosexuality a sin? No where in the bible did it say it is a sin unless I'm blind and it is actually in the bible.

The bible says and I quote "if a man beds down with another man as he would a women they have done a horrible thing, and should be put to death"

My point exactly, it is a sin only and only if you practice it.

Summary: Homosexuality is only a sin if it is practiced. Being homosexual is not by itself considered sinning.

It's a lot to take in, but here is where the debate currently lies:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My question: It does not make any sense for homosexuality to exist. Other sins such as murder or stealing possible have an incentive behind them, but homosexuality is considered natural and a trait gained from birth through genetics. Why does God bestow something that is condemned on people, knowing it is wrong?
Consider this list of Sins found throughout the Bible:
https://au.answers.yahoo.com/question/i ... 314AAt5Lnk
Skimming through, I could not see any which were naturally occuring.

Spiritualist here, but no specific religious affiliation.

The truth is the Bible is so vague and there are so many versions out there that it's just simply too hard to figure out what exactly is actually true and what is just distorted by the whoever author/translator to suit his/her own cause.

Leviticus state that a man could not lay another man as if the man is his wife, which means that as long as they don't...well...lay, it's okay to be homosexual, if one wants to follow the EXACT rules and not distort them. So homosexual seemed fine as long as no...well...sexual in*******se is involved, which means that homos can hug, hold hands, I'm not sure about kiss though but apparently Leviticus didn't state anything about kissing. Once again, the vague context makes it very confusing.


Side Note: Something I didn't get was that Leviticus didn't state regarding a woman could not lay another woman as if the woman is her husband. So Lesbians are allowed?

Lol!
You want to use science? Please do.
If homosexuality was natural Mr.evolution, then 2 homosexual individuals would be able to reproduce and have fertile offspring.
Is that the case?
Lemme help you with that: No.
As such, homosexuals as I said should "in theory" be eliminated by natural selection , but we have disrupted the cycle through genetic modifications due to plastics, pollution and even unaswerable unknown procedures.

What's with this "plastics, pollution" rubbish? Try and formulate an intelligent argument before suggesting that homosexuality exists because of how and what we manufacture.
It's too difficult to attack that question head on. Some studies suggest that homosexuality exists due to prevent over-population, as well as for them to take care of orphaned children or something. Who knows? I just want to know the reasoning behind their existence.

Lol!
You want to use science? Please do.
If homosexuality was natural Mr.evolution, then 2 homosexual individuals would be able to reproduce and have fertile offspring.
Is that the case?
Lemme help you with that: No.
As such, homosexuals as I said should "in theory" be eliminated by natural selection , but we have disrupted the cycle through genetic modifications due to plastics, pollution and even unaswerable unknown procedures.

What's with this "plastics, pollution" rubbish? Try and formulate an intelligent argument before suggesting that homosexuality exists because of how and what we manufacture.
It's too difficult to attack that question head on. Some studies suggest that homosexuality exists due to prevent over-population, as well as for them to take care of orphaned children or something. Who knows? I just want to know the reasoning behind their existence.

Don't call my arguments rubbish. I formulated a rational argument , you didn't like it, your problem.

As for what Solumbum said, +1.

I think my point about being sinful by nature wasnt fully understood. So I will expand a little.

I think we have established that the act of homosexuality is a sin. When people are born homosexual, even if they do not practice it, they are sinning. Yes the Bible does say that if a man lay with another man like his wife then it is an abomination. But in the New Testament, it says "There must not be a hint of sexual immorality among you." Also in the New Testament, it says that even looking at a woman lustfully is a sin. So clearly looking at a woman wrong is a sin. In the same way, thinking homosexual thoughts but not acting upon them is still a sin. This is similar to murder. The OT says that murder is a sin. The New Testament says that even being angry with someone is a sin. Even though they dont act on it, it is still a sin. And another verse about being sinful by nature is Ephesians 2:3 which says, "All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our flesh[a] and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature deserving of wrath."

Don't call my arguments rubbish. I formulated a rational argument , you didn't like it, your problem.

As for what Solumbum said, +1.

Blaming plastics for homosexuality existence is not a rational argument I think you confused 'retarded' with 'rational'. Won't be responding to your posts, because clearly you don't know what you're talking about, and just give the religious people debating a bad name.

I think my point about being sinful by nature wasnt fully understood. So I will expand a little.

I think we have established that the act of homosexuality is a sin. When people are born homosexual, even if they do not practice it, they are sinning. Yes the Bible does say that if a man lay with another man like his wife then it is an abomination. But in the New Testament, it says "There must not be a hint of sexual immorality among you." Also in the New Testament, it says that even looking at a woman lustfully is a sin. So clearly looking at a woman wrong is a sin. In the same way, thinking homosexual thoughts but not acting upon them is still a sin. This is similar to murder. The OT says that murder is a sin. The New Testament says that even being angry with someone is a sin. Even though they dont act on it, it is still a sin. And another verse about being sinful by nature is Ephesians 2:3 which says, "All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our flesh[a] and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature deserving of wrath."

It's really tough to debate against verses from the Bible. I'm kind of looking towards debating with opinions, otherwise there is no point in me bringing up arguments if they will just be shot down by the same lines in the Bible.

Murder and adultery are premeditated actions, which really differs from homosexuality. The point I'm trying to shine a light upon is how I just fail to see how homosexuality can be considered a sin, and why it exists in the first place. The fact that 'Adam and Eve caused the world to be imperfect' just doesn't justify why people would be born with a 'condition' that renders them condemned from day 1... Does this mean they must pray every day to repent, since they can't actually change their sexuality?

Sadly this may be where the thread dies. I can't really see the argument progressing.

Don't call my arguments rubbish. I formulated a rational argument , you didn't like it, your problem.

As for what Solumbum said, +1.

Blaming plastics for homosexuality existence is not a rational argument I think you confused 'retarded' with 'rational'. Won't be responding to your posts, because clearly you don't know what you're talking about, and just give the religious people debating a bad name.

I think my point about being sinful by nature wasnt fully understood. So I will expand a little.

I think we have established that the act of homosexuality is a sin. When people are born homosexual, even if they do not practice it, they are sinning. Yes the Bible does say that if a man lay with another man like his wife then it is an abomination. But in the New Testament, it says "There must not be a hint of sexual immorality among you." Also in the New Testament, it says that even looking at a woman lustfully is a sin. So clearly looking at a woman wrong is a sin. In the same way, thinking homosexual thoughts but not acting upon them is still a sin. This is similar to murder. The OT says that murder is a sin. The New Testament says that even being angry with someone is a sin. Even though they dont act on it, it is still a sin. And another verse about being sinful by nature is Ephesians 2:3 which says, "All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our flesh[a] and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature deserving of wrath."

It's really tough to debate against verses from the Bible. I'm kind of looking towards debating with opinions, otherwise there is no point in me bringing up arguments if they will just be shot down by the same lines in the Bible.

Murder and adultery are premeditated actions, which really differs from homosexuality. The point I'm trying to shine a light upon is how I just fail to see how homosexuality can be considered a sin, and why it exists in the first place. The fact that 'Adam and Eve caused the world to be imperfect' just doesn't justify why people would be born with a 'condition' that renders them condemned from day 1... Does this mean they must pray every day to repent, since they can't actually change their sexuality?

Sadly this may be where the thread dies. I can't really see the argument progressing.

Now you stoop to insults? You're the retard Armo.
Here are some articles backing my claim.
1) http://m.topix.com/forum/world/australi ... VS5QJ82E5P
2)http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread552398/pg1
Why don't you get your grey cells warmed up aye?

Now you stoop to insults? You're the retard Armo.
Here are some articles backing my claim.
1) http://m.topix.com/forum/world/australi ... VS5QJ82E5P
2)http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread552398/pg1
Why don't you get your grey cells warmed up aye?

>Says I stooped to insults
>Insults back

Please, if you're going to state such claims, back them up with academic journals or something... You're going to get this thread locked, I want an answer from Ghandy.