Homosexuality decoded
HerrGrimm wrote:
MCalavera wrote:
HerrGrimm wrote:
No, really, it matters, name and year published?
Why does it matter exactly?
Even if it's a collection of books written by various authors, what does it show? The NT teachings were generally in alliance with the OT laws concerning perceived moral issues like homosexuality, adultery, lying, murder, stealing, taking God's name in vain, idolatry, and so on.
You would have a case if Jesus and/or his disciples actually said that the OT was wrong/misinterpreted concerning homosexuality. But you don't see that. That's because it was unarguably considered an abomination by the religious Jews at that time.
It's only people like you trying to forcefully make the Bible say that homosexuality is not an abomination.
The translation. The translation depends on the name and the year of the Bible. The verses have consistently changed meaning over the years, more so to please whoever is reading it at the time. You would need to show that the Bible is the ACTUAL translation at the time. I do not know that translation. But what I do know is there was no word for 'homosexuality' back in Paul's time, and Greeks throughout history showed PUBLIC signs of pederasty. It is extremely plausible that Paul was writing about pederasty, not homosexuality. I did not just pick up a book and believed whatever was in it. My basis is on the culture at the time.
Plausible, but if you're talking about that passage in Corinthians, it really does sound like he's talking about homosexuality. The Bible I read it in is the NIV, but I don't know the year. Before anyone accuses me of bigotry, I'm saying I agree with it, just pointing out what it said.
HerrGrimm wrote:
The translation. The translation depends on the name and the year of the Bible. The verses have consistently changed meaning over the years, more so to please whoever is reading it at the time. You would need to show that the Bible is the ACTUAL translation at the time. I do not know that translation. But what I do know is there was no word for 'homosexuality' back in Paul's time, and Greeks throughout history showed PUBLIC signs of pederasty. It is extremely plausible that Paul was writing about pederasty, not homosexuality. I did not just pick up a book and believed whatever was in it. My basis is on the culture at the time.
Check all the versions on BibleGateway and compare.
It should be very obvious that the Bible condemns homosexuality regardless of the translation. The act of homosexuality is even described in the Bible so that it's clear what exactly is being condemned.
CaptainTrips222 wrote:
Plausible, but if you're talking about that passage in Corinthians, it really does sound like he's talking about homosexuality. The Bible I read it in is the NIV, but I don't know the year. Before anyone accuses me of bigotry, I'm saying I agree with it, just pointing out what it said.
Such as Romans 1:26-27.
Kiran
Velociraptor
Joined: 17 Jun 2010
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 443
Location: Somewhere in Scandinavia
Ragtime wrote:
We are all born with a sin nature, but no one is born committing a sin. We're all born such that we are lying and stealing by the age of three. But later, many of us learn to curb those impulses significantly. That covers sin nature.
People can, of course, be born with a neurological impediment – it happens all the time. And they can surely be born with an impediment that, as it happens, can serve to present its possessor with a specific choice later in life: that between the homosexual and heterosexual mindsets and lifestyles. The neurological defect is, of course, not sin. Neither does it cause sin.
Rather, it serves to present such individuals with a decision as to whether they wish to give into their predilection, or to choose to resist it. One of those two options is forbidden by God, according to Romans 1:26.
And that is the hard-to-see way in which homosexuality and sin are connected.
(The easy-to-see way is when a person “turns gay” after a lifetime of genuine heterosexual disposition.)
People can, of course, be born with a neurological impediment – it happens all the time. And they can surely be born with an impediment that, as it happens, can serve to present its possessor with a specific choice later in life: that between the homosexual and heterosexual mindsets and lifestyles. The neurological defect is, of course, not sin. Neither does it cause sin.
Rather, it serves to present such individuals with a decision as to whether they wish to give into their predilection, or to choose to resist it. One of those two options is forbidden by God, according to Romans 1:26.
And that is the hard-to-see way in which homosexuality and sin are connected.
(The easy-to-see way is when a person “turns gay” after a lifetime of genuine heterosexual disposition.)
Not all children are lying and stealing by the age of three. I can't even remember ever stealing anything in my whole life. That being said, I don't believe loving someone of your own gender is a "mindset" or a neurological impediment. Love is NOT a neurological impediment. The Bible does not condemn love between two people of the same gender, but it does however condemn sexual acts between people of the same gender. There are probably gay couples out there who love each other so deeply that they could die for each other and I don't think God condemns that kind of deep, unselfish love. On the other hand the Bible says that those who practice homosexual acts sin against their own flesh and therefore if you truly love someone of your own gender and believe what the Bible says, then you will not engage in homosexual acts with the one you love so that this person will not sin against their own flesh.
_________________
The modern artist is working with space and time, and expressing his feelings rather than illustrating
- Jackson Pollock
Vigilans wrote:
AceOfSpades wrote:
Making homophobes uncomfortable doesn't help em accept homosexuality or come to terms with it if they happen to be gay, it only makes homophobia worse. If you don't want em acting like children, then don't act like one yourself. Insinuating that they're secretly gay and making the problem worse is an immature way of dealing with it. It is self-defeating, petty, and reflects the shortsightedness of a child.
They're never going to accept homosexuality. I might as well get some laughs at them, because treating them as equals doesn't accomplish anything other then give them a sense of entitlement and credibility that they don't deserve. Making them uncomfortable by posting videos of Village People songs is not childish compared to viewing someone's preference in love and sexual partnership as a 'neurological impediment' because it goes against their interpretations of some 2,000 year old work of fiction
Didn't you call me immature for posting songs?
_________________
I'm now midwifeaspie's piece of meat.
benjimanbreeg wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
AceOfSpades wrote:
Making homophobes uncomfortable doesn't help em accept homosexuality or come to terms with it if they happen to be gay, it only makes homophobia worse. If you don't want em acting like children, then don't act like one yourself. Insinuating that they're secretly gay and making the problem worse is an immature way of dealing with it. It is self-defeating, petty, and reflects the shortsightedness of a child.
They're never going to accept homosexuality. I might as well get some laughs at them, because treating them as equals doesn't accomplish anything other then give them a sense of entitlement and credibility that they don't deserve. Making them uncomfortable by posting videos of Village People songs is not childish compared to viewing someone's preference in love and sexual partnership as a 'neurological impediment' because it goes against their interpretations of some 2,000 year old work of fiction
Didn't you call me immature for posting songs?
You post songs and other irrelevancies as a response to questions you are unwilling to answer because you are intellectually dishonest and disingenuous in addition to the fact that you have no respect for anybody. I post songs as a response to people's unwarranted hatred of a group that they refuse to accept based on a 2000 year old book of fiction. But keep making false equivalencies, you mental gymnast. I don't really care what you think and I doubt anyone else does either
_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do
Vigilans wrote:
... people's unwarranted hatred of a group that they refuse to accept based on a 2000 year old book of fiction.
I think it is a book of historical facts so interspersed with ancient cultural bias which were further editted to include the biases of each age that saw fit to rewrite it that any literal spiritual meaning has been so badly twisted as to be completely improbable as a 'true text' of any sort. But some the true historical facts have survived - purely from an archaelogical stand point. they can identify ancient cites as described in those pages. They can find artefacts containing the names of biblical figures. I'm disinclined to discount the bible as a whole.
Of course, any religious text that supports and encourages the hatred of others is suspect in my book. And, of course, the interpretation of those words is a whole 'nother issue. The god of the Jews was a jealous and vengeful god but even he reserved judgement unto himself. And hate just isn't Jesus' thing. Nor Mohammed's.
Vigilans wrote:
benjimanbreeg wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
AceOfSpades wrote:
Making homophobes uncomfortable doesn't help em accept homosexuality or come to terms with it if they happen to be gay, it only makes homophobia worse. If you don't want em acting like children, then don't act like one yourself. Insinuating that they're secretly gay and making the problem worse is an immature way of dealing with it. It is self-defeating, petty, and reflects the shortsightedness of a child.
They're never going to accept homosexuality. I might as well get some laughs at them, because treating them as equals doesn't accomplish anything other then give them a sense of entitlement and credibility that they don't deserve. Making them uncomfortable by posting videos of Village People songs is not childish compared to viewing someone's preference in love and sexual partnership as a 'neurological impediment' because it goes against their interpretations of some 2,000 year old work of fiction
Didn't you call me immature for posting songs?
You post songs and other irrelevancies as a response to questions you are unwilling to answer because you are intellectually dishonest and disingenuous in addition to the fact that you have no respect for anybody. I post songs as a response to people's unwarranted hatred of a group that they refuse to accept based on a 2000 year old book of fiction. But keep making false equivalencies, you mental gymnast. I don't really care what you think and I doubt anyone else does either
Last edited by AceOfSpades on 25 Apr 2011, 1:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
AceOfSpades wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
benjimanbreeg wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
AceOfSpades wrote:
Making homophobes uncomfortable doesn't help em accept homosexuality or come to terms with it if they happen to be gay, it only makes homophobia worse. If you don't want em acting like children, then don't act like one yourself. Insinuating that they're secretly gay and making the problem worse is an immature way of dealing with it. It is self-defeating, petty, and reflects the shortsightedness of a child.
They're never going to accept homosexuality. I might as well get some laughs at them, because treating them as equals doesn't accomplish anything other then give them a sense of entitlement and credibility that they don't deserve. Making them uncomfortable by posting videos of Village People songs is not childish compared to viewing someone's preference in love and sexual partnership as a 'neurological impediment' because it goes against their interpretations of some 2,000 year old work of fiction
Didn't you call me immature for posting songs?
You post songs and other irrelevancies as a response to questions you are unwilling to answer because you are intellectually dishonest and disingenuous in addition to the fact that you have no respect for anybody. I post songs as a response to people's unwarranted hatred of a group that they refuse to accept based on a 2000 year old book of fiction. But keep making false equivalencies, you mental gymnast. I don't really care what you think and I doubt anyone else does either
Funny that he accused me of 'following him around threads' and claimed I 'overestimated how much he cares' yet here he is again.
_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do
Vigilans wrote:
benjimanbreeg wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
AceOfSpades wrote:
Making homophobes uncomfortable doesn't help em accept homosexuality or come to terms with it if they happen to be gay, it only makes homophobia worse. If you don't want em acting like children, then don't act like one yourself. Insinuating that they're secretly gay and making the problem worse is an immature way of dealing with it. It is self-defeating, petty, and reflects the shortsightedness of a child.
They're never going to accept homosexuality. I might as well get some laughs at them, because treating them as equals doesn't accomplish anything other then give them a sense of entitlement and credibility that they don't deserve. Making them uncomfortable by posting videos of Village People songs is not childish compared to viewing someone's preference in love and sexual partnership as a 'neurological impediment' because it goes against their interpretations of some 2,000 year old work of fiction
Didn't you call me immature for posting songs?
You post songs and other irrelevancies as a response to questions you are unwilling to answer because you are intellectually dishonest and disingenuous in addition to the fact that you have no respect for anybody. I post songs as a response to people's unwarranted hatred of a group that they refuse to accept based on a 2000 year old book of fiction. But keep making false equivalencies, you mental gymnast. I don't really care what you think and I doubt anyone else does either
I was just scanning through this thread, and its always nice to point out when someone is a hypocrite. I'm not sure what these questions are you're on about, probably ones that i'd already answered, but you couldn't take the answer in. Respect for nobody? Lol, I don't respect people, who have no respect for others. And no, I don't have a lot of respect for druggies either, but I can relate to the situation they're in.
_________________
I'm now midwifeaspie's piece of meat.
benjimanbreeg wrote:
I was just scanning through this thread, and its always nice to point out when someone is a hypocrite. I'm not sure what these questions are you're on about, probably ones that i'd already answered, but you couldn't take the answer in. Respect for nobody? Lol, I don't respect people, who have no respect for others. And no, I don't have a lot of respect for druggies either, but I can relate to the situation they're in.
Must be real lonely under the bridge eh? No wonder you got so addicted to weed.
AceOfSpades wrote:
benjimanbreeg wrote:
I was just scanning through this thread, and its always nice to point out when someone is a hypocrite. I'm not sure what these questions are you're on about, probably ones that i'd already answered, but you couldn't take the answer in. Respect for nobody? Lol, I don't respect people, who have no respect for others. And no, I don't have a lot of respect for druggies either, but I can relate to the situation they're in.
Must be real lonely under the bridge eh? No wonder you got so addicted to weed.I had more "friends" when I was into drugs. But you wake up and realize that people who just wanna get stonned or drunk with you aren't real friends.
_________________
I'm now midwifeaspie's piece of meat.
benjimanbreeg wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
benjimanbreeg wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
AceOfSpades wrote:
Making homophobes uncomfortable doesn't help em accept homosexuality or come to terms with it if they happen to be gay, it only makes homophobia worse. If you don't want em acting like children, then don't act like one yourself. Insinuating that they're secretly gay and making the problem worse is an immature way of dealing with it. It is self-defeating, petty, and reflects the shortsightedness of a child.
They're never going to accept homosexuality. I might as well get some laughs at them, because treating them as equals doesn't accomplish anything other then give them a sense of entitlement and credibility that they don't deserve. Making them uncomfortable by posting videos of Village People songs is not childish compared to viewing someone's preference in love and sexual partnership as a 'neurological impediment' because it goes against their interpretations of some 2,000 year old work of fiction
Didn't you call me immature for posting songs?
You post songs and other irrelevancies as a response to questions you are unwilling to answer because you are intellectually dishonest and disingenuous in addition to the fact that you have no respect for anybody. I post songs as a response to people's unwarranted hatred of a group that they refuse to accept based on a 2000 year old book of fiction. But keep making false equivalencies, you mental gymnast. I don't really care what you think and I doubt anyone else does either
I was just scanning through this thread, and its always nice to point out when someone is a hypocrite. I'm not sure what these questions are you're on about, probably ones that i'd already answered, but you couldn't take the answer in. Respect for nobody? Lol, I don't respect people, who have no respect for others. And no, I don't have a lot of respect for druggies either, but I can relate to the situation they're in.
No, you're just full of s**t, in possibly the most absolute regard of any of the posters on this forum who act with such disrespect. This is a typically evasive response from you. Not only did I address that weak attempt at painting hypocrisy, but everyone is pretty aware that you yourself are a hypocrite. You know exactly what I'm talking about, with not answering questions; in various threads that you've decided to be combative with me in. If you want, I'll post links for everyone to see, and rub salt in your butthurt wounds even more. I find it amusing that you claim to not care and yet here you are, still acting butthurt and making stupid accusations. Please, just go away, nobody gives a s**t what you think. And if anyone here is a druggie, its you, because whatever s**t you were smoking obviously got to your head to this day. You really have no respect for others. Almost all of your tripe posts here are vain attempts to offend somebody. Virtually every topic you start is stupid and offensive and pretty obvious flame-baiting in some manner. I really hope the mods decide to re-ban you, you're unworthy of the good people that frequent this forum, who you regularly show callous disregard for
_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do
I hope this thread can go back on topic now, instead of bb flame baiting and doing his usual troll routine
I don't think most homophobes are actually in the closet, personally, but it is noteworthy that some of the most vocal ones turned out to be that way. I think most homophobes are pretty much IRL trolls
_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do
LKL wrote:
@ Ace: link is page 6, 12th post.
It has an incredibly small sample size of 64 people and their sexual arousal is measured by how big their boners were, which we all know isn't the only cause of boners.I found another source for this study (the link to the apa source is down right now but the site has the article) and not only do they say more studies are needed, but that the fight or flight reaction is another possible explanation for their boners:
http://www.unknownnews.org/homophobia.html
Quote:
While their findings are consistent with that theory, the authors note that there is another, competing theoretical explanation: anxiety. According to this theory, viewing the male homosexual videotape may have caused negative emotions (such as anxiety) in the homophobic men, but not in the non-homophobic men. As the authors note, 'anxiety has been shown to enhance arousal and erection,' and so it is also possible that 'a response to homosexual stimuli [in these men] is a function of the threat condition rather than sexual arousal per se. These competing notions can and should be evaluated by future research.'
So it looks like it's safe to assume it's typical oversimplified pop psych BS.
