Instigator / Pro
0
1389
rating
412
debates
44.42%
won
Topic
#5864
Did Jesus preach against homosexuality?
Status
Voting
The participant that receives the most points from the voters is declared a winner.
Voting will end in:
00
DD
:
00
HH
:
00
MM
:
00
SS
Tags
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 5
- Time for argument
- One week
- Max argument characters
- 30,000
- Voting period
- Six months
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
0
1233
rating
403
debates
39.45%
won
Description
Disclaimer : Regardless of the setup for voting win or lose, The aim of this interaction, Is for those that view it, Learn and or take away anything that will amount to any constructive value ultimately. So that counts as anything that'll cause one to reconsider an idea, Understand a subject better, Help build a greater wealth of knowledge getting closer to truth. When either of us has accomplished that with any individual here, That's who the victor of the debate becomes.
Send a message for questions on the topic.
Please do not accept if you foresee yourself not having time to participate.
Round 1
Pro
#1
Did Jesus preach against homosexuality?
Yes.
Did Jesus directly do so ?
No.
That's touching the flesh.
So just we're clear on what the contention is. It is not about what Jesus exactly said or else where's the debate?
So where in scripture did Jesus speak against homosexuality?
Not only in the book of Matthew where he was directly speaking in the flesh but else where , where he's not in the flesh but in the spirit of words given to the prophets. Do you follow?
See , all the scriptures is the word of God.
All Scripture is God-breathed according to 2 Timothy 3:16. All the words out from God as a breath out of man is from God.
This lines up with Deuteronomy 18 and 18
"I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I."
Likewise with holy men of old, the words of God out of God out of the mouths of men that spake. This included Christ himself. But before the body of Christ arrived , that same word of God which he was, was in the prophets.
Christ is the word of God according to Revelation 19:13
"His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God."
This is why Jesus attest the words he speaks are from the Father who is God. This is why no matter the part of the scripture, because him and the Father are one, in the bosom of the father as the scripture teach, when you read in the old testament about homosexuality, that's still Christ being against homosexuality.
So when we're talking about Leviticus 20 or Romans 1, it is all Scripture God breathed, moved on men to speak the word of God, Christ speaking.
This is how deep or I can say as the scripture says , great is the mystery of godliness. I doubt the opposing side anticipated that when I said Jesus Christ, I was also talking about before he was in flesh and blood , before Matthew 19.
But let's get Matthew 19 because the question is , would Jesus contradict his father ?
Would Jesus contradict the making of male and female? Male was made as what male is and likewise the female.
As Scripture says, woman was maddddde for the man. What does that mean "made for the man"?
When something is made for something, we're talking about designed for.
Well the woman was made for the man. Well made for what?
In the book of Matthew 19 , starting at verse
"3 The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?
4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,"
Keywords right here what Jesus is saying, made them male and female . A lot more is being said here than just the two sexes God made and marriage and divorce. The woman was made for the man, right. How was she made from head to toe?
She was made in accordance to how the man was made. See, because she was made for the man and appropriately enough in congruence, the two are one flesh.
"5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder."
No man can separate one flesh that which was one made for the other. Jesus has not contradicted his own Father. His doctrine is not his anyway. He is a prophet with the words of God himself so God is not conflicting himself. So whatever the Father has laid out in the old testament , that is Jesus preaching it likewise. The scriptures say what the Father do, also these things the son doeth likewise.
So with that said, we're back to the old testament where we read about God in Genesis.
First chapter and at verse 28
" And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth"
So what God made was told to be fruitful and multiply so God made it to do so. So what was it made not to do?
That is the truth of the matter , right. It is the truth that according to this , God made them to do what they do with what they're made with. This is the truth of God. Is that what is against the truth of God being preached against?
That is a question to the opposing side. I have another scripture that will further establish this last point of this round that I didn't even intend on posting but it seems I want to just let as much scripture bring forth witnesses so more so by my words are justified.
I'll hold that scripture, to ask the opposing side this question directed towards the opposing position.
Is that what is against the truth of God being preached against?
Con
#2
My opponent failed to define homosexuality.
Homosexuality is attraction to same sex.
Thus, my opponent must present a verse where Jesus (not God or someone else) says that attraction to same sex is bad.
So, to put my case in premise form:
P1. If Jesus preached against homosexuality, then there is a verse where Jesus directly or indirectly labels attraction to same sex as undesirable.
P2. There is no verse where Jesus directly or indirectly labels attraction to same sex as undesirable.
C. It is false that Jesus preached against homosexuality.
P1 is true by definitions and tautology, and required proof from Pro's side.
For me, in order to support P2, I merely need to show that none of the verses my opponent comes up with include Jesus directly or indirectly labeling attraction to same sex as undesirable.
Now, attraction to same sex isnt even mentioned anywhere in the four chapters of Jesus. So we can already conclude that no direct labeling happened.
Which just leaves indirect labeling...
What is indirect labeling?
Indirect labeling of something as bad means to label opposite of it as the only good.
Thus, if my opponent can show verse where Jesus says that only opposite of attraction to same sex is good, that would count as, I guess, indirect labeling.
Notice the word "only".
So to make it simple, Jesus must say that either no attraction is good (no attraction = opposite of same sex attraction) or that attraction to opposite sex is the only one which is good (thus, attractions which are not towards opposite sex would be bad).
We also need to define who "Jesus" is and where he speaks.
Jesus speaks in the New Testament only, but not in the whole of New Testament, but only in Matthew, Mark, John, Luke.
Thus, any verse outside of these 4 is to be considered invalid by default, as it is not word of Jesus.
Not only in the book of Matthew where he was directly speaking in the flesh but else where , where he's not in the flesh but in the spirit of words given to the prophets. Do you follow?
So no verse?
See , all the scriptures is the word of God.
We are talking about the word of Jesus.
All Scripture is God-breathed according to 2 Timothy 3:16. All the words out from God as a breath out of man is from God.
Timothy is not one of 4 chapters where Jesus speaks, thus can be discarded as invalid.
This lines up with Deuteronomy 18 and 18
Also not word of Jesus.
"3 The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,"
This is a verse about divorce. If you marry a woman, it is wrong to divorce her. Since this is not opposite of homosexuality, it is irrelevant.
"5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder."
This is continued verse about divorce. Jesus was asked about if divorce is okay. This has nothing to do with homosexuality.
Also, obviously, not all men cleave to women, so Jesus was obviously not talking about all men, unless you call Jesus a liar.
With no verse from Matthew, Luke, John, or Mike that mentions Jesus preaching against homosexuality directly or indirectly,
P1 and P2 are proven true, thus conclusion follows:
It is false that Jesus preached against homosexuality.
Round 2
Pro
#3
Looks like I'm getting some effort out of the opposing side , this time around. Unfortunately, this will not help the opposing side .
"My opponent failed to define homosexuality.
Homosexuality is attraction to same sex.
Thus, my opponent must present a verse where Jesus (not God or someone else) says that attraction to same sex is bad."
I'm not going to define it. I didn't fail at something that wasn't my responsibility to fulfill. The scripture will define homosexuality and this was done with the teaching of Genesis.
Jesus referred to it himself. So the opposing side has to concede to that. I'll be looking for it next round. The scripture teaches Jesus is God in the flesh so when Jesus is talking, God is talking. When God is talking, Jesus is talking. Unless the opposing side disproves this by scripture, the two don't contradict and the two support one to the other of preaching against homosexuality.
Also the topic is not about homosexuality being bad. It's did Jesus who is God preach against it . He did in the flesh as well as in the spirit so he will not contradict his own self. It's too much a mystery for the opposing side to get. Scripture say great is the mystery of godliness.
Also , the scripture has said nothing about same sex attraction. It has said what Genesis said. He made them male and female and commanded to do what they are made to do.
The opposing side will have to disprove that male and female are not made to do what they were commanded to and prove that being disobedient to God was not or is not preached against.
I believe Jesus said if you don't believe that I am he, you will all likewise perish. You gone die in your sins less you repent . So whatever you do in sin is against Jesus and what you don't repent of is what he preached against.
The opposing side has a lot of work to do. A whole heck of a lot. Better get into those scriptures to prove your point and disprove mine with scripture.
"P1. If Jesus preached against homosexuality, then there is a verse where Jesus directly or indirectly labels attraction to same sex as undesirable.
P2. There is no verse where Jesus directly or indirectly labels attraction to same sex as undesirable.
C. It is false that Jesus preached against homosexuality."
There is a scripture saying there is a way that seems right unto man. The opposing side is dictating what the scriptures ought to read versus what it originally states . It's easier to debunk what you're prepared to debunk versus refuting the arguments made using the scriptures as is. There doesn't have to be scriptures reading how the opposing side would like because we already have scriptures that have been presented and we're yet to see the arguments surrounding them refuted.
My case stands as is.
"Now, attraction to same sex isnt even mentioned anywhere in the four chapters of Jesus. So we can already conclude that no direct labeling happened."
Same sex attraction has never been introduced in any of the argumentation, let alone the scriptures provided. It appears the opposing side assumes homosexuality is just same sex attraction or that's what I meant by homosexuality. But if the opposing actually comprehended everything that was stated in the first round, why is the opposing side responding with irrelevant , inconsistent details not cohesive to anything I said?
This is the problem. People are coming into these debates with rehearsed talking points instead of being able to address points accordingly.
"Thus, if my opponent can show verse where Jesus says that only opposite of attraction to same sex is good, that would count as, I guess, indirect labeling."
Not the debate.
"So to make it simple, Jesus must say that either no attraction is good (no attraction = opposite of same sex attraction) or that attraction to opposite sex is the only one which is good (thus, attractions which are not towards opposite sex would be bad)."
Not going to happen. Scripture teaches what can you do after the king?
The king has already said what he said. You have to dispute that. Not argue what you want him to say.
"We also need to define who "Jesus" is and where he speaks."
This was already taught in the first round. This was already explained. I'm waiting on the opposing side to respond to my points. Maybe I should just skip passed all this.
"Thus, any verse outside of these 4 is to be considered invalid by default, as it is not word of Jesus."
Totally false. The opposing side does not know who Jesus Christ is according to the volume of the book which scripture says that he is .
"So no verse?"
Sure. Patience, we're gonna get there. Scripture say whatsoever things written before time are written for our learning that through patience ....
Alright.
"We are talking about the word of Jesus."
JESUS IS THE WORD OF GOD.
It would of serve the opposing side better to read over all of my points first before responding to one point.
This would have been best for the opposing side being that apparently this person lacks biblical knowledge.
Scripture say speak on what you know. I would have ye be not ignorant.
"Timothy is not one of 4 chapters where Jesus speaks, thus can be discarded as invalid."
All scripture is Jesus breathed to include the writings of Timothy.
"Also not word of Jesus."
All scripture is Jesus breathed to include the writings of Deuteronomy.
"This is a verse about divorce. If you marry a woman, it is wrong to divorce her. Since this is not opposite of homosexuality, it is irrelevant.
This is continued verse about divorce. Jesus was asked about if divorce is okay. This has nothing to do with homosexuality.
Also, obviously, not all men cleave to women, so Jesus was obviously not talking about all men, unless you call Jesus a liar.
With no verse from Matthew, Luke, John, or Mike that mentions Jesus preaching against homosexuality directly or indirectly,
P1 and P2 are proven true, thus conclusion follows:
It is false that Jesus preached against homosexuality."
Did I speak too soon ? The opposing side did not put an effort in to refute what I said. The opposing side didn't respond to my points, did not respond to my points regarding Genesis or any of that .
At this point I do take this as a forfeiture from the opposing side . I do understand the opposing side's lack of biblical understanding of the biblical fact that Jesus is God. So when God speaks , that's Jesus speaking. The topic says Jesus, not the son of God . Got to be mindful of words. When Jesus speaks, God is speaking.
I made elaborate points that Jesus spoke of making them male and female and being made to be fruitful and multiply. The opposing side forfeited in responding to this point. Either the opposing side responds to this particular point or proves homosexuality : male and male or female and female to be fruitful and to multiply or concede .
Jesus says male and female.
I rest my case .
Con
#4
Definition of homosexuality:
Homosexuality is attraction to same sex.
This definition wasnt challenged. Plus, this same definition is found in all English dictionaries, assuming my opponent speaks English here.
P1. If Jesus preached against homosexuality, then there is a verse where Jesus directly or indirectly labels attraction to same sex as undesirable.
This premise (P1) wasnt challenged, and is true by tautology.
P2. There is no verse where Jesus directly or indirectly labels attraction to same sex as undesirable.
My opponent conceded to P2 as well, which we will later see.
Thus, conclusion (anti topic) logically follows:
C. It is false that Jesus preached against homosexuality.
C = anti topic
Now, I will address my opponent's arguments, as mine were unchallenged.
Looks like I'm getting some effort out of the opposing side , this time around. Unfortunately, this will not help the opposing side .
It would help if my opponent actually provided definitions, logical premises and proof for his premises.
I'm not going to define it. I didn't fail at something that wasn't my responsibility to fulfill.
So my opponent doesnt want to use definitions. This is basically concession, since you cannot logically argue without definitions.
The scripture will define homosexuality and this was done with the teaching of Genesis.
My opponent provides no verse, thus this is rejected.
Jesus referred to it himself. So the opposing side has to concede to that.
No verse?
I'll be looking for it next round. The scripture teaches Jesus is God in the flesh so when Jesus is talking, God is talking.
This is incorrect reasoning, and a totally twisted point.
Jesus = God in the flesh
God when not in the flesh = Not Jesus
So even if we accept that Jesus is God in the flesh, then it still logically follows that God isnt Jesus when that God is not in the flesh. So any verse not spoken by Jesus (God in the flesh) is rejected. Any verse spoken by God outside flesh is rejected.
So again, my opponent seems to be running away from his own topic. If you want to discuss about God of the Bible, you should have made that the topic.
You would have lost there too, because the attraction to same sex is literally never mentioned by God of the Bible in the whole Bible.
When God is talking, Jesus is talking.
False.
Unless the opposing side disproves this by scripture
It was disproven by your definition of Jesus. A bad unclear definition, but it did help to destroy your argument.
, the two don't contradict and the two support one to the other of preaching against homosexuality.
This isnt what Jesus supports. This is about what Jesus preached. Do you know what the word "preaching"means? You can support something without preaching about it.
Also the topic is not about homosexuality being bad.
Apparently, topic is not about Jesus either?
It's did Jesus who is God preach against it
Jesus isnt God. By your definition, Jesus is God in the flesh. So Jesus is not "God outside flesh."
. He did in the flesh as well as in the spirit so he will not contradict his own self.
Verses to support those claims?
It's too much a mystery for the opposing side to get. Scripture say great is the mystery of godliness.
Oh its a mystery now?
Also , the scripture has said nothing about same sex attraction.
Well, thats a concession. If scripture said nothing about homosexuality, then it couldnt at the same time say something about homosexuality.
It has said what Genesis said. He made them male and female and commanded to do what they are made to do.
He made first humans male and female and commanded them to multiply. This doesnt contradict with same sex attraction. One can be male and multiply while having same sex attraction. Same sex attraction was literally created by God.
The opposing side will have to disprove that male and female are not made to do what they were commanded to and prove that being disobedient to God was not or is not preached against.
I wont have to disprove anything, since you seem to disprove yourself quite well even without me.
I believe Jesus said if you don't believe that I am he, you will all likewise perish.
No verse?
:(
You gone die in your sins less you repent . So whatever you do in sin is against Jesus and what you don't repent of is what he preached against.
Attraction isnt considered as doing something, since attraction cannot even be controlled by a person. Why would person repent for something he didnt choose, didnt cause and cannot control?
The opposing side has a lot of work to do. A whole heck of a lot. Better get into those scriptures to prove your point and disprove mine with scripture.
No.
There is a scripture saying there is a way that seems right unto man.
Sure.
The opposing side is dictating what the scriptures ought to read versus what it originally states .
Given that the Bible was changed many times over and over, even a Bible doesnt say what a Bible says.
I could have played this dirty and asked you to prove that Bible is actually telling the truth, and not lying. But the situation is difficult enough for your side. You have to prove that Jesus preached against something which wasnt even mentioned in the Bible.
It's easier to debunk what you're prepared to debunk versus refuting the arguments made using the scriptures as is. There doesn't have to be scriptures reading how the opposing side would like because we already have scriptures that have been presented and we're yet to see the arguments surrounding them refuted.
Rambling.
Same sex attraction has never been introduced in any of the argumentation, let alone the scriptures provided. It appears the opposing side assumes homosexuality is just same sex attraction or that's what I meant by homosexuality.
Maybe you need a dictionary, because yes, homosexuality happens to be just attraction towards same sex.
But if the opposing actually comprehended everything that was stated in the first round, why is the opposing side responding with irrelevant , inconsistent details not cohesive to anything I said?
Dictionaries are free on google.
This is the problem. People are coming into these debates with rehearsed talking points instead of being able to address points accordingly.
I am here to debate the topic as it was written in English. So you are complaining that I want to debate the topic instead of letting you change topic to whatever you want.
"Thus, if my opponent can show verse where Jesus says that only opposite of attraction to same sex is good, that would count as, I guess, indirect labeling."Not the debate.
Its the topic.
Not going to happen. Scripture teaches what can you do after the king?
What?
The king has already said what he said. You have to dispute that. Not argue what you want him to say.
The king?
"We also need to define who "Jesus" is and where he speaks."This was already taught in the first round. This was already explained. I'm waiting on the opposing side to respond to my points. Maybe I should just skip passed all this.
My opponent is now telling blatant lies, and trying to change topic after starting topic.
The word "Jesus" is nowhere mentioned in the Old Testament. So when my opponent says that Jesus is mentioned in the Old Testament, he is lying.
Totally false. The opposing side does not know who Jesus Christ is according to the volume of the book which scripture says that he is .
Sadly, my opponent seems to be unable to define what Jesus is.
Sure. Patience, we're gonna get there. Scripture say whatsoever things written before time are written for our learning that through patience ....
Oh, so we have to wait.
JESUS IS THE WORD OF GOD.
Well, sure, so far you have provided 3 contradicting definitons of Jesus.
It would of serve the opposing side better to read over all of my points first before responding to one point.
I dont want to read them again, sorry.
This would have been best for the opposing side being that apparently this person lacks biblical knowledge.
More rambling.
Scripture say speak on what you know. I would have ye be not ignorant.
Rambling.
All scripture is Jesus breathed to include the writings of Timothy.
Jesus breathed to? How do you breathe to scripture?
All scripture is Jesus breathed to include the writings of Deuteronomy.
Unproven claim.
Did I speak too soon ? The opposing side did not put an effort in to refute what I said. The opposing side didn't respond to my points, did not respond to my points regarding Genesis or any of that .
You are confused.
At this point I do take this as a forfeiture from the opposing side . I do understand the opposing side's lack of biblical understanding of the biblical fact that Jesus is God. So when God speaks , that's Jesus speaking. The topic says Jesus, not the son of God . Got to be mindful of words. When Jesus speaks, God is speaking.
Disproven rambling.
I made elaborate points that Jesus spoke of making them male and female and being made to be fruitful and multiply. The opposing side forfeited in responding to this point. Either the opposing side responds to this particular point or proves homosexuality : male and male or female and female to be fruitful and to multiply or concede .
Unproven claims.
Jesus says male and female.
Which doesnt contradict with homosexuality.
Round 3
Pro
#5
I urge the opposing side, you have about a week to respond. Read over everything, consider for some time , think , then respond.
This convulsive responding is demonstrating a listen to respond so to speak versus a listen to understand. You may read to respond or notice it's your turn to respond in lieu of comprehending first to react.
Golden nuggets for who is perceived to be a very young individual.
Now as I'm going through the responses that are not counterpoints from the opposing side, they are just responses. The opposing side is looking to respond like listening to respond instead of to understand.
At this point, the opposing side is not engaging so the opposing side is not giving actual rebuttals based on the scripture I'm giving.
"This is incorrect reasoning, and a totally twisted point.
Jesus = God in the flesh
God when not in the flesh = Not Jesus
So even if we accept that Jesus is God in the flesh, then it still logically follows that God isnt Jesus when that God is not in the flesh. So any verse not spoken by Jesus (God in the flesh) is rejected. Any verse spoken by God outside flesh is rejected.
So again, my opponent seems to be running away from his own topic. If you want to discuss about God of the Bible, you should have made that the topic.
You would have lost there too, because the attraction to same sex is literally never mentioned by God of the Bible in the whole Bible."
The opposing side is giving opinion versus demonstrating through scripture how what I'm saying is incorrect.
This has nothing to do with reasoning and everything to do with what the scripture says.
JESUS said “Haven't you read,” that the one who created them from the beginning 'made them male and female". So prove through scripture male and male , female and female is to be fruitful and multiply. You wanted what Jesus said, there you go.
Jesus said haven't you read meaning these other words else where. Jesus said himself his words are not his. So what's outside of Jesus in the flesh , before he was in the flesh is just as valid. So that eliminates the argument of "well it's gotta be just when Jesus was in the flesh". Scripture say he's in the volume of the book. When you hear the apostles, you here Jesus.
You don't know, you just don't know. Scripture is not broken. That's what the scripture says.
Why? You getting a lesson here. Why is it not broken?
All scripture is God breathed. Every word out of the mouth of God.
In the book of John , it teaches the word became flesh . Jesus is referred to as the word of God in the book of revelation.
So prove through scripture male and male , female and female is to be fruitful and multiply.
You're not done there. Once you prove that, prove and explain why Jesus never preached it.
You got your work cut out . As the scripture say , the harvest is ripe. Laborers are few.
You can't get any labor from me with you on this.
You're heavily laden .
"False."
It's not false until proven false. This is what I'm talking about. The opposing side is making no rebuttals. Go to the scripture and prove what I'm saying is incorrect.
Scripture say prove all things. If you won't do that , you indirectly concede. You are displaying you don't know where to go in the scripture to prove your point.
"It was disproven by your definition of Jesus. A bad unclear definition, but it did help to destroy your argument."
The opposing side is conceding. The opposing side is refusing to use scripture in a biblical topic thus far.
"This isnt what Jesus supports. This is about what Jesus preached. Do you know what the word "preaching"means? You can support something without preaching about it."
It is about what is supported. When you preach against something, you don't support it . That's why it's called preached against. Jesus who was God preached against homosexuality which would be the opposite of what is supported. He definitely supported about what God made because he said it in reference to what he was preaching to the Pharisees.
JESUS said “Haven't you read,” that the one who created them from the beginning 'made them male and female".
The opposing side has not demonstrated any where in scripture that Jesus contradicted God saying he made them male and male to be fruitful and multiply and likewise with female and female.
That would be changing the truth of God for a lie as taught in Romans 1 and Jesus said he is the way, the truth.
Just concede .
"Apparently, topic is not about Jesus either?"
Apparently you don't fully understand or know who Jesus was. You think he was just a man in the flesh.
If you don't know much, you should of stayed out of this topic. Scripture say, seek not things above your understanding.
"Jesus isnt God. By your definition, Jesus is God in the flesh. So Jesus is not "God outside flesh." "
I didn't say Jesus is ONLY God in the flesh. Of all thy getting get understanding. Scripture say, understand what thou readest .
"Verses to support those claims?"
Excuse me, are you asking for scripture that proves Jesus was God?
"Oh its a mystery now?"
Now and before now . Scripture say great is the mystery and for you to take a biblical topic was folly on your part.
"Well, thats a concession. If scripture said nothing about homosexuality, then it couldnt at the same time say something about homosexuality."
The opposing side is deliberately avoiding the sexuality of homosexuality because it refutes any opposing case.
The opposing side is avoiding the sexuality aspect being preached against all throughout scripture.
So prove through scripture male and male , female and female is to be fruitful and multiply.
Watch how quiet the opposing side is going to be on this point. If this was live, you would hear the opposing side say "......................................…..........".
"He made first humans male and female and commanded them to multiply. This doesnt contradict with same sex attraction. One can be male and multiply while having same sex attraction. Same sex attraction was literally created by God."
You yet to give a scripture to back this up. I have scripture that says male and female, fruitful and multiply. Now show us in scripture where male and female can do other than what they were made for to do having female and male flesh.
Then after that, reconcile it with Romans 1 that teaches that the men and women changed the natural use of their bodies and this is called changing the truth of God for a lie which would be against what Jesus preached. According to the scriptures, he preached truth because was the way, the truth .
Again, you're heavily laden. So laden with burden. If you could demonstrate that you've learned the scriptures, you would of learned of Jesus. As he said "learn of me", your "burdens are light" .
"I wont have to disprove anything, since you seem to disprove yourself quite well even without me."
Then you concede and have been reproved. Scripture says prove all things . You've made claims about God of the scripture, all these claims and not proven anything with book , chapter and verse. This is folly. I should not even respond to you anymore as the scripture teaches, answer not a man or a person according to his or the person's folly.
You've always been a joke.
"No verse?"
Scripture teach they accuse you of doing what they themselves are actually doing.
You yet to give an scripture to back this up. I have scripture that says male and female, fruitful and multiply. Now show us in scripture where male and female can do other than what they were made for to do having female and male flesh.
Then after that, reconcile it with Romans 1 that teaches that the men and women changed the natural use of their bodies and this is called changing the truth of God for a lie which would be against what Jesus preached. According to the scriptures, he preached truth because was the way, the truth .
"I could have played this dirty and asked you to prove that Bible is actually telling the truth, and not lying. But the situation is difficult enough for your side. You have to prove that Jesus preached against something which wasnt even mentioned in the Bible."
Oh go right ahead and do something as dirty and invalid such as moving the goalpost to proving the scripture is true. You can't prove your case so commit your fallacy in conceding alongside. You can't prove one thing you're saying against me from scripture.
The rest of what you said is folly so I'm not going to deal with anything of it that is not a rebuttal.
This I say to you, verily verily as the scripture says, you either get scripture to prove your points or you forfeit. After you forfeit, actually think the next time before you decide to take on a biblically based topic.
So prove through scripture male and male , female and female is to be fruitful and multiply.
Show us in scripture where male and female can do other than what they were made for to do having female and male flesh.
Then after that, reconcile it with Romans 1 that teaches that the men and women changed the natural use of their bodies and this is called changing the truth of God for a lie which would be against what Jesus preached. According to the scriptures, he preached truth because was the way, the truth .
Your last chance.
Con
#6
I urge the opposing side, you have about a week to respond. Read over everything, consider for some time , think , then respond.
Okay, I will.
This convulsive responding is demonstrating a listen to respond so to speak versus a listen to understand. You may read to respond or notice it's your turn to respond in lieu of comprehending first to react.
I am very certain that I am supposed to respond. The debate is all about responding to argument. I dont have to understand what I am responding to. I can respond to something even if I dont understand it.
Golden nuggets for who is perceived to be a very young individual.
Thanks, I guess. Yes, I am still young and hot.
Now as I'm going through the responses that are not counterpoints from the opposing side, they are just responses. The opposing side is looking to respond like listening to respond instead of to understand.
Thats great.
At this point, the opposing side is not engaging so the opposing side is not giving actual rebuttals based on the scripture I'm giving.
I asked for verses. You never provided.
The opposing side is giving opinion versus demonstrating through scripture how what I'm saying is incorrect.
Its not just an opinion. Its logic which you didnt respond to.
This has nothing to do with reasoning and everything to do with what the scripture says.
No, the topic is about what Jesus said.
JESUS said “Haven't you read,” that the one who created them from the beginning 'made them male and female". So prove through scripture male and male , female and female is to be fruitful and multiply. You wanted what Jesus said, there you go.
Again, homosexuality is not a contradiction to any of that. You can be gay and still multiply.
Jesus said haven't you read meaning these other words else where. Jesus said himself his words are not his.
If Jesus's words arent Jesus's, then they cannot be Jesus's words.
So what's outside of Jesus in the flesh , before he was in the flesh is just as valid. So that eliminates the argument of "well it's gotta be just when Jesus was in the flesh". Scripture say he's in the volume of the book. When you hear the apostles, you here Jesus.
My opponent seems to have a great problem with even defining Jesus, and now abandons his previous definition.
You don't know, you just don't know. Scripture is not broken. That's what the scripture says.
Scripture says that scripture is right?
All scripture is God breathed. Every word out of the mouth of God.
I guess now you need to prove this irrelevant claim.
In the book of John , it teaches the word became flesh . Jesus is referred to as the word of God in the book of revelation.
So Jesus is not God, but a word of God?
So prove through scripture male and male , female and female is to be fruitful and multiply.
Thats irrelevant to this debate.
You're not done there. Once you prove that, prove and explain why Jesus never preached it.
I need to prove a negative and why negative is negative?
You got your work cut out . As the scripture say , the harvest is ripe. Laborers are few.
Not sure what labor shortages have to do with this.
You can't get any labor from me with you on this.
Usually, the point of debate is for both debaters to give arguments.
It's not false until proven false. This is what I'm talking about. The opposing side is making no rebuttals. Go to the scripture and prove what I'm saying is incorrect.
So you are not going to prove your claims?
Scripture say prove all things.
Well, by all means, obey the scripture.
The opposing side is conceding. The opposing side is refusing to use scripture in a biblical topic thus far.
You should use the scripture to prove your claims.
It is about what is supported. When you preach against something, you don't support it . That's why it's called preached against. Jesus who was God preached against homosexuality which would be the opposite of what is supported. He definitely supported about what God made because he said it in reference to what he was preaching to the Pharisees.
So you think that if "preaching against" includes "not supporting", then "not supporting" includes "preaching against"?
Person can lack support for something while at the same time not talking about it at all.
JESUS said “Haven't you read,” that the one who created them from the beginning 'made them male and female".
This debate isnt about creation of male and female.
The opposing side has not demonstrated any where in scripture that Jesus contradicted God saying he made them male and male to be fruitful and multiply and likewise with female and female.
Homosexuality is an attraction. One can be homosexual and still be fruitful and multiply.
That would be changing the truth of God for a lie as taught in Romans 1 and Jesus said he is the way, the truth.
No verse?
Apparently you don't fully understand or know who Jesus was. You think he was just a man in the flesh.
Was he God in the flesh?
Scripture say, seek not things above your understanding.
Not sure how is that a good advice.
I didn't say Jesus is ONLY God in the flesh. Of all thy getting get understanding. Scripture say, understand what thou readest .
Well, if you define Jesus as "God in the flesh", then I dont see why contradict your own definition and say that Jesus is not God in the flesh.
Excuse me, are you asking for scripture that proves Jesus was God?
You dont have that either?
Now and before now . Scripture say great is the mystery and for you to take a biblical topic was folly on your part.
I guess you concede that you dont know scripture because its mystery.
The opposing side is deliberately avoiding the sexuality of homosexuality because it refutes any opposing case.
Sexuality of homosexuality? I dont think its mandatory for homosexuals to have sex.
So prove through scripture male and male , female and female is to be fruitful and multiply.
That was never even my claim, so I dont have to prove it, as it has nothing to do with the topic.
Watch how quiet the opposing side is going to be on this point. If this was live, you would hear the opposing side say "......................................…..........".
I am sure you do well in live debates.
You yet to give a scripture to back this up.
It is a widely known fact that homosexual attraction isnt a choice.
I have scripture that says male and female, fruitful and multiply.
I have scripture which says that Jesus turned water into wine. But neither this neither your part of scripture is relevant to topic.
Now show us in scripture where male and female can do other than what they were made for to do having female and male flesh.
I am pretty sure that if God didnt want homosexuality to exist, he wouldnt have created it.
Then after that, reconcile it with Romans 1 that teaches that the men and women changed the natural use of their bodies and this is called changing the truth of God for a lie which would be against what Jesus preached.
Romans 1 isnt Jesus's words. Also, we are not talking about any specific use of body. Homosexuality is an attraction which exists in a person no matter what person does.
Again, you're heavily laden. So laden with burden. If you could demonstrate that you've learned the scriptures, you would of learned of Jesus. As he said "learn of me", your "burdens are light" .
You said scripture is a mystery, so no one can really learn it.
Then you concede and have been reproved. Scripture says prove all things .
I dont concede. I merely say that you are the one who needs to prove your claims.
You've made claims about God of the scripture, all these claims and not proven anything with book , chapter and verse.
I dont think this debate requires me to limit my proof pool to Bible alone. If that was the case, you would lose this debate immediatelly because Bible literally nowhere even mentions homosexuality.
This is folly. I should not even respond to you anymore as the scripture teaches, answer not a man or a person according to his or the person's folly.
Sure.
You've always been a joke.
Thanks, I guess.
Scripture teach they accuse you of doing what they themselves are actually doing.
I accuse you by asking for proof?
You yet to give an scripture to back this up. I have scripture that says male and female, fruitful and multiply. Now show us in scripture where male and female can do other than what they were made for to do having female and male flesh.
Irrelevant.
Then after that, reconcile it with Romans 1 that teaches that the men and women changed the natural use of their bodies and this is called changing the truth of God for a lie which would be against what Jesus preached. According to the scriptures, he preached truth because was the way, the truth .
Irrelevant, as Romans 1 isnt Jesus's word. Its word of one disciple, and disciples werent flawless. All of them betrayed Jesus by denying Jesus.
Also, Romans 1 doesnt mention any attraction, neither do homosexuals change their attraction at will.
Oh go right ahead and do something as dirty and invalid such as moving the goalpost to proving the scripture is true.
Oh no, I am not going to make this too difficult for you. You are already trying hard to find verse which mentions attraction to men.
You can't prove your case so commit your fallacy in conceding alongside. You can't prove one thing you're saying against me from scripture.
I cant prove that Jesus didnt preach against homosexuality? Can you prove that Jesus wasnt homosexual? You are Pro, so prove the claim you are making.
This I say to you, verily verily as the scripture says, you either get scripture to prove your points or you forfeit.
Well, by all means, prove your points.
After you forfeit, actually think the next time before you decide to take on a biblically based topic.
Not sure why you resort to this rambling.
So prove through scripture male and male , female and female is to be fruitful and multiply.
I dont even need to.
Show us in scripture where male and female can do other than what they were made for to do having female and male flesh.
Can you show us otherwise?
Then after that, reconcile it with Romans 1 that teaches that the men and women changed the natural use of their bodies and this is called changing the truth of God for a lie which would be against what Jesus preached. According to the scriptures, he preached truth because was the way, the truth .
Repeating same argument 3 times in one round?
Your last chance.
Scary talk.
Round 4
Pro
#7
"I am very certain that I am supposed to respond. The debate is all about responding to argument. I dont have to understand what I am responding to. I can respond to something even if I dont understand it."
Then I kindly ask you in the future not to participate in a debate topic with me if you're not going to take it serious to the point of understanding what is being said and what the position and argument is. I'd appreciate that respect.
Based on the remaining responses from the opposing side, the lack of understanding is being demonstrated from the opposing side. We're going in circles.
The opposing side presented no scripture that I asked for last round.
Apparently the opposing side as expected does not take this seriously and has never really taken any subjects that way.
For the benefit of those reading and edification.
2 Timothy 3:16
"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be."
Like I said. All scripture is God breathed.
Is Jesus God?
2 Philippians , starting at verse 5
"Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God"
So Jesus has the form of God or nature of God. Which is spirit. Scripture says God is a spirit so he was the spirit of God in the flesh. He also said while being in the flesh you see the Father when you see him according to John 14.
The Father is God according to 2 Corinthians 8.
So this is not so much a Jesus is God debate. It's not up for dispute. You have to accept that as the cannon. Only those outside of the Christian or holiness religion dispute Jesus being God. We're talking about the scriptures based on the scriptures. It's a given.
The opposing side just assumed that when Jesus was mentioned, that exclusively meant son of God.
No, Jesus existed in flesh as well as outside of it.
He said before Abraham was, I am.
John 8:58
"Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. "
So the words of Jesus was given and inspired to be spoken and written all throughout scripture outside of his time in flesh and blood.
Abraham was before Leviticus 18:22
"You shall not lie with a man as one does with a woman. It is an abomination
Are you going to say this is not preaching against something?
Telling you what not to do is against.
Abraham was before Leviticus 18 . Abraham was back there in Genesis and Jesus said he was before that.
To the opposing side, just take correction on challenging this with me. It be stupid not to as the scripture says .
Con
#8
My opponent again cant seem to decide what Jesus is.
Is Jesus God, God in the flesh, form of God... what is "Jesus"?
These definitions provided by my opponent contradict each other.
My opponent now wants to say that Jesus is God (not its form or God in flesh as he claimed previously. Thus, Jesus is not God in flesh and Jesus is not one form of God.).
So he wants to make a claim that God preached against homosexuality.
Fine. Even if I accept that Bible is true, which I dont have to... even if I accept that Jesus is exactly same as God, which I also dont have to... my opponent's position still wouldnt be proved.
Show us a verse where this God of yours says that homosexuality is bad.
Homosexuality, again, isnt a sexual activity. It isnt even a voluntary action. It is merely an attraction which exists in the brain. It isnt a choice of a person, thus it cannot be included in choice by free will. If it is not product of free will, then it can only be made by God, unless you want to argue that something other than God designed humans, which would contradict the Bible. In the same way I have hands and legs, I have sexual attraction. All given by God.
My opponent again gives verse which condemns sex between men. Since homosexuality isnt sex between men, thus the verse is irrelevant.
Round 5
No content
Looks like there is nothing here yet
Just to be sure, by taking the pro stance you're arguing that Jesus did preach against homosexuality right