09 Sep 18
Originally posted by @fmfLOL, none of it, and thus one of the reasons why it is categorically improper.
What kind of homosexual sex "leads to procreation when done properly"?
Heterosexual sex for pleasure exists still within the framework of familial bonds, and is acceptable even if not done explicitly for procreation.
Homosexuality does not have such a framework andis thus, at its core, a deviation from the natural path of procreation for man.
Originally posted by @secondsonIn reality, as things stand, outside of the church, which is "governed" by God who sets the rules, the world is running amuck in its efforts to satisfy whatever cravings it can imagine. I'm reminded of a verse in psalm 2 from nearly 3000 years ago when God was working through Israel to the world at that time. "They"(the world) said then as they still do today, "Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us." The question asked in verse one is, "Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?" Your "non-religious" world view notwithstanding God has His witness present in the world today, in the church and by His Word, warning the world of The Wrath to come on all those that live ungodly, and that includes homosexuality and everything else that violates God's moral code. I realize that this is overload for those of you that don't believe, but we, the church of God, who hold to the clear teaching of scripture, know what's coming. Thing is though, it's already here. Right under your nose. People love the darkness, and instead of taking a rational look at the statistical analyses of the consequences of immoral sexual conduct in all of its manifestations, they'd rather ignore the problems plaguing the human race and sit in their safe zones arguing over what they think is true about morality based on their own selfish interpretations and definitions of it. But that's the world for you. Always has been and always will be, that is until the end of it, which happens to everyone everyday sooner or later. Then the judgment.
You are just making assertions based your religious beliefs here. And you seem to be doing it in order to sidestep what I put to you about why homosexual sex is not, in and of itself, immoral.
09 Sep 18
Originally posted by @fmfChanging cultural norms mean nothing. Man is weak and corrupted easily, and I do not accept the idea that whatever the majority of people wills is de facto good.
Like a lot of people - indeed, like a steadily increasing number of people who are helping to create and shape new norms - I don't see the morality of it in the same way as you do. I think arguments along the lines of something is against the norms or something is against the law are very one dimensional. I'd stick to your superstitious notions of "sin" if I were you.
You're just appealing to the massive changes in people in this circumstance, but I highly doubt that you would go to Iraq and say see? The people are changing into more religious and even more Shi'a, and so we should just go with this; society is restructuring itself. Get with the times!
So why is it valid here?
I am not sure how far I want to discuss this with you, though, because you never go far enough. That is to say, you do not have substance; you have just hot wind. You are not up to the task of a full discussion on this.
09 Sep 18
Originally posted by @philokaliaYou think homosexual sex is "improper" I get that, but you're not saying anything about how it is immoral.
LOL, none of it, and thus one of the reasons why it is categorically improper.
Heterosexual sex for pleasure exists still within the framework of familial bonds, and is acceptable even if not done explicitly for procreation.
Homosexuality does not have such a framework andis thus, at its core, a deviation from the natural path of procreation for man.
09 Sep 18
Originally posted by @divegeesterYou are British, right, Dive?
It’s amusing how you are defensive of people defecating in the street but attack people for being homosexual. An interesting perpesctive on your twisted mind.
- I am defensive of people who have very different social conventions due to the fact that much of the society is incredibly impoverished and still lives in almost feudal conditions. It's sad to make fun of people who, having no recourse, are forced to use the streets as thei rbathroom.
It's mean spirited prodding of people who are poorer and worst off than yourself.
(2) I do not quite get what you are saying? I am not attacking people for being homosexual; I am saying that homosexuality is immoral and a sin, and it is not the framework for procreation that we should ever pursue, and that society should not be indulgent towards it.
I am not attacking anyone.
But I understand how, if you're incapable of having a meaningful dialog with someone on it, you might be inclined ot just throw out any sort of accusation like this.
09 Sep 18
Originally posted by @philokaliaNo. I am just saying that I don't think homosexuality is immoral. Norms are made up of what people think and do.
You're just appealing to the massive changes in people in this circumstance....
09 Sep 18
Originally posted by @secondsonThe "rules of morality", as you put it, are the various moral maps that each of us have to help us relate to others and navigate our way through life's interactions and dilemmas. They are a guide. Your "rules of morality" are not the same as mine.
What you're saying is, that if morality governs behavior, then homosexuality is institutionalized, and if so, by whom are the rules of morality set?
09 Sep 18
Originally posted by @philokaliaI get that you disapprove of homosexual sex and that you think it is improper but you are not giving me any reason to see it as immoral.
I am not sure how far I want to discuss this with you, though, because you never go far enough. That is to say, you do not have substance; you have just hot wind. You are not up to the task of a full discussion on this.
09 Sep 18
Originally posted by @thinkofone"The reality is that you - like many other Christians - use the Bible to create a morality based on your own selfish interpretations and definitions of it."
The reality is that you - like many other Christians - use the Bible to create a morality based on your own selfish interpretations and definitions of it. You then have the arrogance to ascribe your self-serving morality to God.
What you call "light" is darkness.
Luke 11
34“The eye is the lamp of your body; when your eye is clear, your whole bo ...[text shortened]... NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.’ 40“On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets.”[/b]
Blatantly false. The Bible is clear about what is moral and what is not.
And you refuse to acknowledge the truth of God's Word with every post you make.
09 Sep 18
Originally posted by @philokaliaYou disapprove of "romps"?
What is interesting is that this would allow for both homosexuals to engage in wild sexual romps on the side if they were both aware of it and it was part of the 'agreement,' so to speak.
09 Sep 18
Originally posted by @fmf
Your "rules of morality" are not the same as mine.
I didn't make the rules. They are God's rules. I obey them.
You, and most others, on the other hand adopt rules that suit your own purposes, excusing yourself from adherence to an objective standard of an absolute code of moral conduct designed for everyone great or small.
09 Sep 18
Originally posted by @secondsonI don't think there are any such things as "God's rules", at least in so far as we are aware. I understand that you think there are. As long as your interactions with me and others are morally sound, it doesn't matter to me if you happen to frame your moral sensibilities as "rules" of supernatural origin that you "obey".
I didn't make the rules. They are God's rules. I obey them.
Originally posted by @secondsonYou left off an important part of the quote. Inadvertently I'm sure.
[b]"The reality is that you - like many other Christians - use the Bible to create a morality based on your own selfish interpretations and definitions of it."
Blatantly false. The Bible is clear about what is moral and what is not.
And you refuse to acknowledge the truth of God's Word with every post you make.[/b]
The reality is that you - like many other Christians - use the Bible to create a morality based on your own selfish interpretations and definitions of it. You then have the arrogance to ascribe your self-serving morality to God.
You also failed to address any of the scripture I cited. Inadvertently I'm sure.
Blatantly false. The Bible is clear about what is moral and what is not.
Says the guy who repeatedly denied the fact that God clearly, explicitly and unambiguously condoned chattel slavery in the following:
Leviticus 25
44“ ‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life,..
Only a complete lack of integrity allows you to hold on to your delusion of the Bible being "clear about what is moral and what is not".
You can't be honest with yourself no less others.
Originally posted by @fmfDo you even understand what morality means?
[b]In reality, as things stand, outside of the church, which is "governed" by God who sets the rules, the world is running amuck in its efforts to satisfy whatever cravings it can imagine. I'm reminded of a verse in psalm 2 from nearly 3000 years ago when God was working through Israel to the world at that time. "They"(the world) said then as they still do toda ...[text shortened]... order to sidestep what I put to you about why homosexual sex is not, in and of itself, immoral.
Merriam-Webster : beliefs about what is right behavior and what is wrong behavior.
Homosexual sex is a behavior in case you never noticed, and such behavior is condemned by God in the Bible.
You can redefine and believe as you will, but you would be doing so based on your own predispositions and not by any inherent authority.
09 Sep 18
Originally posted by @thinkofone
You left off an important part of the quote. Inadvertently I'm sure.The reality is that you - like many other Christians - use the Bible to create a morality based on your own selfish interpretations and definitions of it. [b]You then have the arrogance to ascribe your self-serving morality to God.
You also failed to address any ...[text shortened]... lear about what is moral and what is not".
You can't be honest with yourself no less others.[/b]You are deflecting.
You lost this debate just as you did the one you are now resurrecting.
All you're doing is cherry picking three verses out of context to support you dogmatic and narrow minded perspective without regard for both the context of the chapter in question and the cultural history of the era.
Your arguments are as bogus as you are.