Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

Author: GnosticChristianBishop

Posts

Total: 163
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@GnosticChristianBishop
"In my view - homosexual nature was not created by God. "

Who is God's co-creator then?

God created humanity - Adam and Eve.  

Their children are not directly created by God - but indirectly through humanity. 

A person's nature is neither homosexual nor heterosexual. It is sinful.  Yet God did not create a sinful nature. 

It is one which already created very good but has now been tainted and distorted by sin. Sin has distorted - reshaped - remade - it - but not created human nature. 

Humans born after the fall have inherited this distorted nature - not biologically although it certainly influences it - but covenantally. 


Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@zedvictor4
Sin is a concept relative to biblical bollocks.

And people have been fiddling with each others bollocks and bits, ever since they realised it was temporarily satisfying.
Sin is anything that falls short of God's standards. 

Fornication and adultery. Swearing. Stealing. Murder. Taking the Lord's name in vain. 
eventuality001
eventuality001's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 66
0
0
3
eventuality001's avatar
eventuality001
0
0
3
Deu 22:5 The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment:

for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.


Rom 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men

:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,078
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret
How on Earth would you know what a GODS standards were?

Your bible and it's subsequent interpretations are all human standards.

We have no proof that anyone has ever discussed standards with a GOD.


Your illogic is based upon one giant assumption, that a GOD might have standards. 

Which is based upon the even bigger assumption, that there is a GOD who might consider standards.
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,205
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
Just when you thought NOAH'S work resume couldn't get any more impressive.  
His not gathering one male and one female of every animal. 
His gathering one non homosexual  male and one non homosexual  female of every animal.  Breeding pairs if you will. 

I mean.
A Homosexual  zebra has to look alot like a non homosexual zebra doesn't it?
He wouldn't waste his time catching  gay parots.  

Picture a non gay male snail. 

Noah is the dude.
A jack of all trades if you will. 
The right man for the job. 




zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,078
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
Most snails are hermaphrodites.


What the fuck was GODDO thinking,

When he turned out these perverse little fuckers?
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@zedvictor4
How on Earth would you know what a GODS standards were?
God does not leave himself without a witness.   The Christian holds the view that the Spirit of God - the Holy Spirit witnesses with our spirit in relation to the things of God.  The truth about God and his standards are in the Bible. 

Your bible and it's subsequent interpretations are all human standards.
The Bible is God's word. It proclaims itself as such. It is rational that God would communicate with words and put it within an objective piece of writing. It would be irrational to have it any other way.  The Bible is one of the few books in the world that ACTUALLY proclaims it is of divine origin.  The Koran does not for instance.  


We have no proof that anyone has ever discussed standards with a GOD.

What does that even mean? You don't even have proof that you exist.  Or that your grandfather exists.  I have the Bible as proof. A book that God says he wrote. A book that proclaims that it is written by God.  

Your illogic is based upon one giant assumption, that a GOD might have standards. 
What a weird comment.   Of course God has standards.   That goes without saying. To reject such a thing  requires you to provide an objective standard. 


Which is based upon the even bigger assumption, that there is a GOD who might consider standards.

Ha Ha! God does have standards. Otherwise - the concept of sin has no point.   I get that you don't like this. And must reject it.  Yet - God's standards as understood in the Bible is and remains the standard of perfection in history.   Now I know I am not getting into the nitty gritty here. Yet your comments seem to spring out of a deep resentment in your heart.  That surprises me.  You don't normally come across as so emotional.  I apologize if I have hit a sore point. I will not however apologize for the truth. 
Barnardot
Barnardot's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 13
0
0
1
Barnardot's avatar
Barnardot
0
0
1
-->
@Tradesecret
So what does sin have to do with being a homo? And your totally wrong about nature because it is natural to be homosexual and always has been.
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,205
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
-->
@zedvictor4
Hey what A Homosexual hermaphrodite.
Could there be such a thing ?
Are there heterosexual hermaphrodite and homosexual hermaphrodites.  
This messes with nat  v nert

Hang on. 
Thrre cant be a hermaphrodite homosexual.
This doesn't seem to be fair. 

Look  I'm gonna Google ( hermaphrodites )  
Back soon. 
Actually  ( Incognito Google search )  ( hermaphrodites ) i don't really need that in my search history. 
Or do i.? 

So many questions.  
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,205
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
Oh did i say hermaphrodites. 
My bad .. 
I meant intersex.   Its 2022.  Hermaphrodite =  Intersex. 

Now im thining  about a intersex midgets / dwarfs. 
Would they be a dwarf intersex. 
Is there dwarf hermaphrodites?  

Back to google. 
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,205
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
I'll get to the bottom  of it.
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,205
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
Anddďdddddddddddddddd Porn hub. 
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,611
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@zedvictor4

Yes, most land snails are hermaphrodites (both male and female within one individual). During mating, sperm enters the partner's copulation pouch, which is not a safe haven because digestive processes begin! The hormones help the sperm escape that pouch so they can find their way to the fertilization chamber.

It is attributed to God doing Ecstasy when he was creating this simulation.
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,205
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
-->
@FLRW
Mmmmmmm
Real fuckin cute like.

Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,205
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
Noah knew
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Barnardot
So what does sin have to do with being a homo?
Sin in the Bible is understood to be anything that falls shorts of the Standards of God. 
In Christian theology sin is described in two different ways.  One as sin - and one as sins.  In other words there is both a generality to sin - and a specificity. 

Generally, every human is born into the estate of sin.   Ever since the fall of Adam and Eve everyone has inherited sin covenantally as soon as they are conceived.  The only exception to this may be Jesus who was miraculously born from the virgin Mary after God breathed into her - in a similar fashion to the way he breathed in Adam to give him life.  In this sense Jesus became a new thing. Just like Adam was a new thing initially. 

The estate of sin generally means that every human is born awaiting death.  Everyone includes the pope and every wonderful delightful and good human.  It also includes all the evil and all those somewhere between.     This estate of sin - essentially means that humans decide for themselves what is right and what is wrong - and the core of what sin is.  People are born to die.  This is the estate of sin and death.  A decision made by our first and greatest human and we live with the consequences that he knew would be brought about by his decision.   This decision of course amounted to treason.  Why? Because only God is truly able to determine what right and wrong is - and the best decisions humans make - always fall short of this mark. 

Specifically, sins are the individual sins that humans make.  The 10 commandments provide a basic list of these sins and every other sin is derived from these 10. The 10 themselves can be succinctly reduced to two - love God and love others.  When we fail to love God and when we fail to love others - we sin.  The bible lists lots of sins - some of them specifically for the nation of Israel.  Some of them specifically for certain tribes within Israel. Some of them for the nations of the world and people within it.   There were some sins that only Israelites could commit. And did not refer to the Gentiles.  For instance it was not sinful for a Gentile to eat pork whereas for a Jew it was sinful.  Of course Gentiles were considered unclean. But unclean is not to ALWAYS be equated with sinfulness. Although at times it was equated with it.  

Homosexuality in the OT and in the NT is considered sinful.   The point of its sinfulness is that it breaches the 7th Commandment.  The 7th Commandment's positive assertion was to promote the sanctity of marriage and the making and raising of children.  Homosexuality by virtue of simple math cannot create children. It requires either adoption or a surrogate.  Neither of which is the ideal situation. 

Similarly, we can see why prostitution is sinful. Why we see fornication is sinful. Why we see adultery is sinful. Why we see pedophilia is sinful. Why we see bestiality is sinful. Why we see masturbation is sinful.   Why we see bigamy is sinful and polygamy too.  This is why even a de-facto relationship is considered sinful in the eyes of God.  And pornography.  And incest. Homosexuality is but one of many sinful behaviors according to the bible.   But heterosexual activity outside of marriage is just as sinful.  The bible is not homophobic - it is pro marriage and pro children.  

Unfortunately many Christians spend far too much time focused on homosexuality giving a distorted view of the bible. 

And your totally wrong about nature because it is natural to be homosexual and always has been.
It is once sense natural since the fall of man for people to sin. Homosexuality is therefore probably part of the natural order of sinfulness.  

We ought not compare ourselves to animals.  Animals for instance might in some species have same sex attraction. Yet animals also have lots of other natural tendencies which humans do not share and would not wish to put on humans. For instance cannibalism.  Would we eat other and consider that normal just because some animal species do that? Of course not.  Some species kill for the sake of killing, for pleasure. Should we consider this therefore normal for humans? Of course not. Some animals eat their own facies. Should we consider that normal or natural and start doing this? No of course not.  Some animals rip each other off. Some steal other species children or eggs. Some poo where they eat. Some wear clothes and some don't.  The point is - humans are humans. We are not animals. We have our own rules and customs - that are quite distinct from every animal on this planet.   We would be stupid to look at an animal and say - well that is normal for them - or even a hundred different types of species - it is therefore normal for us.  It is a silly argument - and one that simpletons rely upon. 

We choose who we are attracted too and we choose who we are not attracted too.  We have the ability of self -control.  We don't look at that person and just give in to our desires and lusts - there has to be reciprocal consent for it to take place.   Animals just do what they want - no matter whether there is consent or not.  Rapists do the same thing.   

I can choose not to look at or desire any other person save for my wife.   I can control my self. Can you?   Or do you just follow your groin - and let it lead you where ever it wants to go?  


zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,078
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret
The concept of sin, is the concept of sin.

Just like the concept of a GOD (any GOD), is the concept of a GOD.

Just like a book is a book,

And everything that you just espoused is of human conceptual origin.

The only reason for thinking otherwise, is thinking otherwise.

No actual GODS required.


Barnardot
Barnardot's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 13
0
0
1
Barnardot's avatar
Barnardot
0
0
1
-->
@Tradesecret
I see the thing your getting at through all that which is interesting but totally wrong because your working on the pretext that being a homo is sinful which really means that your scared of them and trying to make the Bible fit around what you think. But the Bible is old and nobody with a decent mind goes along with all that dog mess now anyway.
So what you really should be doing is clean up your mind and stop trying to make out that other people are wrong because their not like you just so you can feel good off of it.
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,356
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@Barnardot
Eh, I'm an atheist,
But I see a lot of value in the Bible, values, perspectives, ways of life.
Though not 'all of it.

As for individual and societal states of being,
Well, people have ideas of what's right or wrong,
Not 'necessarily due to fear,
But because of values of what is a good or evil life, actions, responsibilities.
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Barnardot
I see the thing your getting at through all that which is interesting but totally wrong because your working on the pretext that being a homo is sinful which really means that your scared of them and trying to make the Bible fit around what you think.
Hi Barnadot,

thanks for your comments. How about you tell us what a sin is? And who determines it as well.    BTW  I am not scared of homosexuals any more than I am scared of those who have any sort of sexual experience before marriage - which is well - most people.  I don't need to try and make the bible say anything  - it is out there and open - transparent. 

But the Bible is old and nobody with a decent mind goes along with all that dog mess now anyway.
Really. Is that what you are going to go with? So do you think we should reject Plato and Aristotle and anyone who is old? you might well insult the Chinese and the Greeks and everyone else in one foul sweep. 


So what you really should be doing is clean up your mind and stop trying to make out that other people are wrong because their not like you just so you can feel good off of it.
Thanks for your moralistic advice. 
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@zedvictor4
The concept of sin, is the concept of sin.

Just like the concept of a GOD (any GOD), is the concept of a GOD.

Just like a book is a book,

And everything that you just espoused is of human conceptual origin.

The only reason for thinking otherwise, is thinking otherwise.

No actual GODS required.
Really? 
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,078
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret
Pretty straightforward and logical.

Unlike nailing people to posts to die for my sins, type of stuff.
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@zedvictor4
The  Wisdom of God v the wisdom of humanity. 

Hmmm, I know whose wisdom I prefer. 


zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,078
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret
Wisdom is as wisdom does.


I could say that I prefer a GODS biscuits, to human biscuits.

Doesn't actually change anything.
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@zedvictor4
Wisdom is as wisdom does.


I could say that I prefer a GODS biscuits, to human biscuits.

Doesn't actually change anything.
Wisdom is not as wisdom does. What a load of codswallop. 

You can say anything you like - wisdom is still wisdom.  

The Bible distinguishes between the wisdom of God and the wisdom of man. 

Man wants miracles or it wants fine arguments. 

Yet the wisdom of God says - that the wisdom of man is as foolishness to God.  

Christ crucified - is staggeringly brilliant - yet the wise humans fall over the place with that one.  

Humanity thinks humanity is wise and God is dumb.  

And it has been the way since the beginning. Adam and Eve wanted to decide for themselves what was good and what was evil.  They wanted to be wise - and so it has been ever since.  And yet, God left man to his own devices and what happens?  Climate change, genocide, wars, pedophilia, abuse, crime, - hey all this is the wisdom of humanity.  

If humanity had simply let God be God and humanity be humanity - and if humanity had not been jealous and wanted what was never theirs in the first place- then the world would be a much different place.   This is the truth.  

Of course, humanity in its wisdom, denies the creation, denies God, denies the fall and arrogance of humanity - and thinks it is wise and full of wisdom. And you like the rest of humanity just go along for the ride - because you cannot think outside of the narrow parameters of this framework.  It is ironic. 

Christ Crucified.  Why would or how could someone die for someone else?  How could any person represent someone else? This could never happen in our world? Could it?  Christ Crucified.  That God would become a man - how foolish? After all, everyone knows to do anything useful you must be powerful..  Man must become a God - with superpowers.  That is wisdom - man's wisdom anyway.  

Christ Crucified - God humbling himself to the very creation he made. What foolishness. What stupidity.  

Give me God's wisdom any day of the week.   
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,078
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret
Good stuff.

But it's all just your opinion, based on data acquired from a book of myths an legends.

And in my opinion based, also on acquired data, it's as I've just stated.


We both think that we are being wise,

And I think that I am being wiser than you,

Because there has never been a real GOD to verify such stuff.

We are currently  lacking a GODS wisdom.
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@zedvictor4
Therein is the difference. I don't think I am being wise. 

You dislike the bible ok. 

And yet - there it is.  A wise God communicates to the world in a way that is transparent. A way that is easily accessible. A way that is not reliant upon magic. A way that is not reliant upon making some weird and wonderful incantation. A way that is so simple it is laughable. 

And yet, the mighty and wise man - won't jump into the Jordan River and wash himself. Give him something much harder - much more difficult - something that has real zest and power. And then the wise man might think it is worth pursuing to see if it fair dinkum.

But give him something even the plebs can read and understand - and it becomes obviously not worthwhile.

Pride - wisdom - intelligence - power - authority - - all these are worthy - but not humility - not something the weak can understand.  

Is it myth and legend? Conveniently for some - so that they can be dismissed.  

It is your loss. 
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,078
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret
I'm indifferent with regards the Bible.

It's just a book, variously interpreted, variously translated and variously republished.

The so called word of your particular GOD, probably predates the Bible by a good few hundred years anyway.

So consequently what has been arrived at today is most certainly of later human concoction, with a typical mythological format.

Elements of human reality, juxtaposed with a naive creation hypothesis, 2000 year old social ideology and a smattering of supernatural fantasy thrown in for good measure.

There are just so many reasons why the Bible is not representative of a clever, tri-omni GOD.


FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,611
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
Why is there no mention of Jesus in the historical record until 40 years after his death?
If you think that Jesus was a genuine miracle worker who resurrected the dead left and right, fed multitudes, and healed more sick people than you can shake a stick at, then I suppose we should expect more people to have noticed and mentioned it.
But if we’re taking a purely historical point of view, Jesus was an itinerant peasant preacher, faith healer, and exorcist—none of this was particularly rare, and none of it was at all notable. He probably did not have a large following, and most likely no one would have bothered to mention him at all if his followers had not come to believe that he had risen from the dead and ascended to heaven. He was not notable in his own time; he only became notable in the subsequent decades as the size of his ‘following’ grew.
Very few writers at the time bothered to write about messianic claimants and Jewish preachers at all. The few who did, like Josephus and Tacitus, did mention Jesus, however briefly, but only when posterity had made him significant.
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@FLRW
Why is there no mention of Jesus in the historical record until 40 years after his death?
If you think that Jesus was a genuine miracle worker who resurrected the dead left and right, fed multitudes, and healed more sick people than you can shake a stick at, then I suppose we should expect more people to have noticed and mentioned it.
But if we’re taking a purely historical point of view, Jesus was an itinerant peasant preacher, faith healer, and exorcist—none of this was particularly rare, and none of it was at all notable. He probably did not have a large following, and most likely no one would have bothered to mention him at all if his followers had not come to believe that he had risen from the dead and ascended to heaven. He was not notable in his own time; he only became notable in the subsequent decades as the size of his ‘following’ grew.
Very few writers at the time bothered to write about messianic claimants and Jewish preachers at all. The few who did, like Josephus and Tacitus, did mention Jesus, however briefly, but only when posterity had made him significant.
So just to make sure you are serious about this historical record.  Can you please list the names of all or some at any rate - of authors who lived in Israel at the time of Jesus?  And please provide links to their writings for all of us.  After all, I am sure that there must have been some - and some historical matters that took place in Israel even if Jesus did not exist.  

Oh and while you are doing that - can you please provide the date of the earliest ACTUAL document we have from any of those authors?  That would be nice.