Most all homosexuals are born that way. I would not call it a illness or a deformity though. You are right however that humans are born different everyday. Some with blue eyes, some with brown. Some are born left handed and some right. Others are born ambidextrous. Some are born homosexual and some are born heterosexual. 

 

No matter what we are all humans and unless you are hurting another human being you should be treated equally and not as if you are a second class citizen just because you happened to be born different than the majority.

 

So to answer your question I would say: You already have the answer. You stated it above. You know its possible and happens all the time.

The answer is easy-they ARE born that way. BUT, being born gay is neither a deformity OR an illness.

***********

I'm not saying it's a deformity, I'm saying the the possibilities are huge.

Too many people disagree they are born that way.

I guess I'll go to gaga to get a real amswer.

 

The only ones that would disagree that they're born that way are ignorant. I'm sure there are people that "experiment" because they're curious, or even unsure of their own feelings. But anyone that is truly a homosexual is born a homosexual. 

 

Then, why does God call the homosexual lifestyle an abomination (Leviticus 18:22), a detestable act (Leviticus 20:13), unnatural (Romans 1:26), a degrading passion (Romans 1:26), an indecent act (Romans 1:27), contrary to sound teaching (1 Timothy 1:10), unrighteous (1 Corinthians 6:9), and say that those who practice it will never inherit the kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 6:9)?

 

Yet, we read, in John 3:16, "For God so loved the world (you, me, everyone ever born), that He gave His only begotten Son" to die for us. 

 

Now, would God, who will go that far to offer eternal life to everyone -- really create people such as He has described above?

 

Even an atheist mind must see the inconsistency in that line of thought.  No, God would not create ANYONE to be an abomination in His eyes.   Therefore, no one is conceived, i.e., created in the womb by God, to be homosexual.

 

God creates perfect.  And, then man corrupts.  That, my dear Friend, is the only explanation for why we have homosexuals and other sexual deviants in our societies today.

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

 

Choppy's baby pic-a story for another day.

***************

That's the way I see it.

____________

Ah, Bill, let's dance again.  Leviticus - does it apply or doesn't it?  All the rest are Paul, a sufferer of seizures and the Oral Roberts of his day, whose only authority is the OT - Leviticus - which doesn't apply, or does it? 

 

And I'll ask for a fourth time - when does God stop interfering with fetal development? 

Hi Vic,

 

Here's something they probable never taught you in catechism:

 

2 Timothy 3:16, "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness."

 

Then, you childishly declare, "All the rest are Paul, a sufferer of seizures and the Oral Roberts of his day, whose only authority is the OT - Leviticus - which doesn't apply, or does it?"

 

If Paul was such a loser -- then, why did God choose him to be the most prolific writer of New Testament books?  

 

Vic, are YOU saying that God was wrong in choosing Paul?

 

Are you saying that Jesus Christ was wrong when He told Ananias, in Acts 9:15, "Go, for he (Paul) is a chosen instrument of Mine, to bear My name before the Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel."

Vic, my Friend, it would seem to me that you are disagreeing with God the Father and Jesus Christ in your foolish, Biblically illiterate statement -- not Bill Gray.

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

You are addled again, Bill.  Try answering my questions first.

****************************

 

Crusty,,,,,,,,,Your boy has got me mixed up with you.

 

He's got John lying about homosexuals and I think it's pointless

to talk to a liar. And besides, I don't speak yabba dabba.

 

You might want transfer this

 

 

 

You GO, Choppy!

Choppy sez-"this one's iron, this one's steel, one don't get you, the other one will".

Hi all,

 

God says:

 

The homosexual lifestyle an abomination (Leviticus 18:22), a detestable act (Leviticus 20:13), unnatural (Romans 1:26), a degrading passion (Romans 1:26), an indecent act (Romans 1:27), contrary to sound teaching (1 Timothy 1:10), unrighteous (1 Corinthians 6:9), and say that those who practice it will never inherit the kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 6:9)?

 

And Jennifer says:

 

The only ones that would disagree that they're born that way are ignorant.  I'm sure there are people that "experiment" because they're curious, or even unsure of their own feelings.  But anyone that is truly a homosexual is born a homosexual.

 

Now, who should we believe -- the eternally preexisting God who created the heavens and the earth, and all things within?

 

Or, Jennifer, self professed atheist and believer in nothing except her own religion of Nothing, i.e., atheism?

 

I realize this is a hard decision to make.  But, I believe that anyone with an IQ over 15 knows the true answer.  And, all the others -- well, we will just pray for them.

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

 

 

You pray about it, I'll do something sensible.

Perfect????? God only makes perfect!?!???? Here is one Christian that will jump up and down and call bs on that!!! Try and tell a child with a trisomy or CF or osteogenesis imperfecta or any other catastrophic congenital defect that God made them perfect. No way. God is God but biology is science. Genetic mutations, congenital defects and Catastrophic conditions cannot be defined as perfection. There is a time to be give glory to God and there is a time to accept genetic differences, that are, far from perfect. Now I do not, in any way mean to equate homosexuality to aforementioned catastrophic diseases. Don't get me wrong. But to refute the fact that some people are born with homosexual tendencies because •"God makes perfect" is a simplistic and ignorant statement which can be disproven anytime one ventures out of the house.

Reminds me of the time the honey badgers hired me to get them better press. But that's a story for another day.

 

Then what is a hermaphrodite to do?

Then what is a hermaphrodite to do?

-----------------

Just a guess, but don't they usually see which sex is dominant and go from there? 

i'm certainly in agreement with what God says in His Holy Word. i love all people, we share the same Creator. but i do not accept things contrary to the will of God. otherwise there's no point to God being my Savior and Lord, in fact He wouldn't be. 

since many believe otherwise, let's say some people ARE born homosexual. ok then, because God clearly states His disgust with such, the right thing to do is ABSTAIN from that behavior/lifestyle/DNA'd. if i love ANYthing that God says is wrong, i must lay it down and keep it out of my life, regardless of what it takes. that's just denying self to follow God. and there IS a way to do that, same as with any sin...

James 4:7
Submit yourselves, then, to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you.

1 Corinthians 10:13
No temptation has overtaken you except what is common to mankind. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can endure it.

1 John 2:16
Everything that is in the world—the craving for whatever the body feels, the craving for whatever the eyes see and the arrogant pride in one’s possessions—is not of the Father but is of the world. 

2 Peter 2:2-18

You'll be OK once you get that beat out of your head.

Invictus: 'And I'll ask for a fourth time - when does God stop interfering with fetal development?'

 

Mr Vic, God doesn't 'interfere' with fetal development. there is no fetus or any development if God doesn't create it. He gives the first and last life-breaths taken, and every breath in between. every involuntary movement created to sustain life in our body (breath, blood flow, heartbeat, etc) is orchestrated and continuously worked by our Creator God. 

Jeremiah 1:4-5

⁴ The word of the Lord came to me (Jeremiah), saying,

 

Bestworking: ''You'll be OK once you get that beat out of your head.''

 

Best, the beat in my head corollates with the beat of my heart, and both mark time with the heartbeat of God. i have died with Christ to the spiritual forces of this world, and i no longer submit to it's rules. (reference Colossians 2:20)

i pray His best for your life always...

in Him, i am the hippie girl.

 

And what made you assume I was posting to you?? 

_______________

You are just as addled as Bill.  So, you are saying that God creates homosexuals.  Why would God create something and then call it an abomination?   God seems a little conflicted, don't you think?

Hi VP,

You declare, "Perfect?????  God only makes perfect!?!????  Here is one Christian that will jump up and down and call bs on that!!!  Try and tell a child with a trisomy or CF or osteogenesis imperfecta or any other catastrophic congenital defect that God made them perfect."

And, what I wrote was, "God creates perfect.  And, then man corrupts.  That, my dear Friend, is the only explanation for why we have homosexuals and other sexual deviants in our societies today."

Does the Roman Catholic church teach that God did not create Adam and Eve perfect?  The Bible says He did.

What happened?   Man's "free will" happened -- and Adam sinned by disobeying God.  The result:  sin and death, physical and spiritual, entered the perfect creation.

Spiritual death was immediate -- and only by repenting and receiving Jesus Christ as personal Lord and Savior can this be reversed.

Physical death was not immediate.  Instead, the process of death began immediately.  Where man was created to be immortal; man was now very mortal and upon conception, man begins his journey toward physical death.  And, illnesses, birth defects, and the many thousands of diseases were the result of the physical death curse caused by Adam disobeying God.

So, birth defects such as Down's Syndrome and the other diseases you mention all came into existence as part of the physical death curse Adam brought upon mankind.

You tell us, "No way.  God is God but biology is science."

So, are you saying that He is God -- BUT, He has no control over biology or other sciences?   I believe that even your Vatican will agree that when  "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth"  (Genesis 1:1) -- biology and ALL the sciences were part of that creation.  In other words, biology and science did not create God.  God created the sciences -- and all the laws governing those sciences.

I do believe the Vatican will agree with me on that.  Yet, let me be sure I understand what you are telling me:  Are you saying that biology and science trump God?  If so, I think you should check with your church.

Next, you say, "Genetic mutations, congenital defects and Catastrophic conditions cannot be defined as perfection."

I agree with you completely.  However, none of these can be attributed to God.  All of these can only be attributed to man and man's fallen state.  Do you agree?

Then, you say, "There is a time to be give glory to God and there is a time to accept genetic differences, that are, far from perfect."

VP, is there truly ever a time to not give glory to God?  I know of no such time.  And, yes, there are times to realize and accept the fact that genetic defects do occur -- far too frequently.   However, none of these can be laid on the shoulders of God.  Man gets all the credit.

Finally, you declare, "Now I do not, in any way mean to equate homosexuality to aforementioned catastrophic diseases.  Don't get me wrong.  But to refute the fact that some people are born with homosexual tendencies because • "God makes perfect" is a simplistic and ignorant statement which can be disproven anytime one ventures out of the house."

Does the Roman Catholic believe and teach that conception is from God?   Can anything be from God which is not perfect?   Yet, man can take what God has created perfect -- and totally corrupted it.  And, that is what we see with genetic defects -- whether it be Down's Syndrome, homosexuality, or any other genetic birth defect.

But, I would make an educated suggestion that 99.5% of homosexuals became homosexual AFTER birth -- like years after birth.  So, to what do we attribute these converts?  It can only be environmental, i.e., family, conditions -- societal pressures -- and peer pressures, etc.

VP, below are excerpts from a Vatican document:

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH

LETTER TO THE BISHOPS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
ON THE PASTORAL CARE OF HOMOSEXUAL PERSONS

http://www.vatican.va/roman_cu...xual-persons_en.html

4. An essential dimension of authentic pastoral care is the identification of causes of confusion regarding the Church's teaching.  One is a new exegesis of Sacred Scripture which claims variously that Scripture has nothing to say on the subject of homosexuality, or that it somehow tacitly approves of it, or that all of its moral injunctions are so culture-bound that they are no longer applicable to contemporary life.  These views are gravely erroneous and call for particular attention here.

6. Providing a basic plan for understanding this entire discussion of homosexuality is the theology of creation we find in Genesis.  God, in his infinite wisdom and love, brings into existence all of reality as a reflection of his goodness.  He fashions mankind, male and female, in his own image and likeness.  Human beings, therefore, are nothing less than the work of God himself; and in the complementarity of the sexes, they are called to reflect the inner unity of the Creator.  They do this in a striking way in their cooperation with him in the transmission of life by a mutual donation of the self to the other.

In Genesis 3, we find that this truth about persons being an image of God has been obscured by original sin.  There inevitably follows a loss of awareness of the covenantal character of the union these persons had with God and with each other.  The human body retains its "spousal significance" but this is now clouded by sin.  Thus, in Genesis 19:1-11, the deterioration due to sin continues in the story of the men of Sodom.  There can be no doubt of the moral judgment made there against homosexual relations.  In Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, in the course of describing the conditions necessary for belonging to the Chosen People, the author excludes from the People of God those who behave in a homosexual fashion.

7. The Church, obedient to the Lord who founded her and gave to her the sacramental life, celebrates the divine plan of the loving and live-giving union of men and women in the sacrament of marriage.  It is only in the marital relationship that the use of the sexual faculty can be morally good.  A person engaging in homosexual behaviour therefore acts immorally.

To chose someone of the same sex for one's sexual activity is to annul the rich symbolism and meaning, not to mention the goals, of the Creator's sexual design.  Homosexual activity is not a complementary union, able to transmit life; and so it thwarts the call to a life of that form of self-giving which the Gospel says is the essence of Christian living.  This does not mean that homosexual persons are not often generous and giving of themselves; but when they engage in homosexual activity they confirm within themselves a disordered sexual inclination which is essentially self-indulgent.

In a particular way, we would ask the Bishops to support, with the means at their disposal, the development of appropriate forms of pastoral care for homosexual persons.  These would include the assistance of the psychological, sociological and medical sciences, in full accord with the teaching of the Church.

We encourage the Bishops to promote appropriate catechetical programmes based on the truth about human sexuality in its relationship to the family as taught by the Church.  Such programmes should provide a good context within which to deal with the question of homosexuality.

(During an audience granted to the undersigned Prefect, His Holiness, Pope John Paul II, approved this Letter, adopted in an ordinary session of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and ordered it to be published.)

Given at Rome, 1 October 1986.

JOSEPH CARDINAL RATZINGER Prefect

ALBERTO BOVONE Titular Archbishop of Caesarea in Numidia Secretary

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

VP, do you agree with this Vatican document?  Or disagree with it?  If you believe that God created anyone as a homosexual, you must disagree with this document.  And, please note the signature of the author at the bottom.  I believe you recognize him.

So, to VP, and all my Roman Catholic Friends, and my wanna-be Roman Catholic Friend, on the Religion Forum -- do you agree or disagree with Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, now better known as Pope Benedict XVI?

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Originally Posted by Bestworking:     

The only ones that would disagree that they're born that way are ignorant.

_____________

Originally Posted by vplee123:

Perfect????? God only makes perfect!?!???? Here is one Christian that will jump up and down and call bs on that!!! Try and tell a child with a trisomy or CF or osteogenesis imperfecta or any other catastrophic congenital defect that God made them perfect. No way. God is God but biology is science. Genetic mutations, congenital defects and Catastrophic conditions cannot be defined as perfection. There is a time to be give glory to God and there is a time to accept genetic differences, that are, far from perfect.

_____________

I’m far from ignorant, but I’ll admit that I just don’t know. I’ve said before that IF the Bible is true, IF God truly exist, why would He create a human being that He would later refer to as an abomination? Same goes for prayer…….IF He exist, why would He say Ask, and it shall be given you, but not give when you asked, why would He say seek, and ye shall find, only to make it impossible for you to find, why would He say knock, and it shall be opened unto you, only to not answer the door when you knock? I could go on & on but you get my meaning. I’ve been given answers to those questions but they were never given in a way to satisfy me, it was no more than someone’s opinion.

It’s that thing of asking 10 people the meaning of a scripture & you get 10 different answers, but all 10 can’t be right.

 

Vplee, I understand what you’re saying. It's a horrible, cruel, thing tell a child that is born with an imperfect body that God only makes perfect. Tell a child with a fatal disease to ask & God will take that disease away, only for the child to be disappointed when the disease is still there.

You say there’s a time to accept genetic differences, but if I am to believe that God created us, where does genetic differences come in the picture & why? Did someone not make those genetic differences?

 

I know people that consider themselves a Christian because they were raised in a Christian home, (as was I) and it was expected when they got old enough, they would become a Christian because that was the thing to do. They never questioned anything the Bible said because they were raised on it. Others become a Christian out of fear, so they convince themselves they are one. There are others, like Bill Gray, that wears the hat & sadly, convince some people they are something they’re not.

 

I question, I want to know what’s true, what’s real. I refuse to accept something just because someone says it or because it’s in a book written by men thousands of years ago.

(I suggest any post by Bill Gray, in refernece to my post, be ignored as his opinions are no more than the ramblings of a liar, & nothing more tham what the Bible refers to as a wolf in sheep's clothing)

 

How does any of the Scriptures you presented prove "God creates perfect" ? Seems Scriptures once again disagrees with you Mr. Gray.

 

Rom 8:20  For the creature (all created humanity) was made subject to vanity (futility/moral depravity) , not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,
Rom 8:21  Because the creature (all created humanity)  itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.

 

Do you just make stuff up as you go along? Or are you parroting what you have heard all your life?

 

You know we are all sinners Mr Gray, so why do you pick on homosexuals? You commit one sin your guilty of all.

 

Jas 2:10  For whoever shall keep the whole Law and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.
Jas 2:11  For He who said, "Do not commit adultery," also said, "Do not murder." But if you do not commit adultery, yet if you murder, you have become a transgressor of the Law.

Semi, I know. There are so many questions.. I honestly wrap myself up in the fact that God is a mystery- His ways are not for us to understand all the time..

And Mr Gray I have a firm understanding of my Catholic faith. I assure you I do not need any documents copied and pasted from you.

  For He who said, "Do not commit adultery," also said, "Do not murder." But if you do not commit adultery, yet if you murder, you have become a transgressor of the Law.

===============

This is where the "cherry picking" comes in. It's like I've always seen, IF it is something they want to do, they can "justify" it using the bible. IF it's something they think others shouldn't be doing, they try to "justify" it with the bible. You'd think they could see their own hypocrisy, and sometimes I think they do, that's why some try so hard to point out and condemn what other people are doing that does no harm to them. They're trying to make themselves feel a little less like the ******** that they are. Sadly for them, it doesn't work.

 

______________

As far as Bill is concerned, my ticket was punched long ago.  I think I'm in the baggage car.

I bet the Pope enjoys a good pork BBQ sandwich every now and again.  Probably likes all kinds of shellfish, and watcha bet his pointy hat is is made with mixed fibers?  Using Leviticus as your authority is dicey at best, and in those that call homosexuals abominations, it is downright hypocritical.  But somehow, they all reconcile the inconsistencies and contradictions in such a way that they can push their agenda while still chewing on a rib.

******************************

 

You're still getting me mixed up with Crusty, Mr hippy dippy.

Try to keep up.

 

So dip, what happened here? Was this what God had in mind?

There's about two thousand different interpretations of the Bible.

Maybe you could work up a few more as long as you don't

understand the first thousands any more than Billie-je.

 

     

________________

I noticed there's a reality show coming on TV about these 2 girls.

__________

What is it with some of these people? What are they reading that I'm not reading?

___________

Pay no attention to him, he's a liar & a fool.

 

 

What I was wondering about, Abigail Loraine Hensel and

Brittany Lee Hensel, is this. Are two Souls contained in the one

body? I would say Yes, but why would there be two?

 

Hi GD,

 

You asked me, "How does any of the Scriptures you presented prove "God creates perfect" ?  Seems Scriptures once again disagrees with you Mr. Gray."

 

I believe we can agree upon "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" (Genesis 1:1).

 

This tells us that God has and does create everything -- right?   So, if, as you claim, God has created anything which is not perfect -- then He is not perfect.  And, if He is not perfect -- then, He is not God.

 

GD, do you believe that He is God, the Triune God of the Bible?    If so, where is He not perfect?

 

So, who caused all the birth defects and illnesses?   The answer can only be MAN, starting with Adam.   Adam disobeyed God, bringing sin and death into the creation.  Physical death was not instantaneous, but, a process.   Man dies of old age.   Man also dies of illnesses and diseases -- which are the end effects of man's fallen life.  

 

Therefore, God created perfect.   Man corrupted it.   Simple.  And, if YOU  do not believe this -- then, you do not believe in God.  And, if you do not believe in God, well what can I say? 

 

At that point you will have moved past following Herbert W. Armstrong, L. Ray Smith, and the Unitarian Universalists church to being an full time atheist who totally denies God.

 

GD, it would seem to me that you are wading in very muddy waters right now.

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

---

Hi VP,

 

The document I gave you came straight from your current Pope:

LETTER TO THE BISHOPS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
ON THE PASTORAL CARE OF HOMOSEXUAL PERSONS

http://www.vatican.va/roman_cu...xual-persons_en.html

 

Are you now telling us that you disagree with him, your Pope?   Or are you saying that because Bill Gray brought his document to your attention -- it is no longer valid?

 

If that is true -- then maybe I should bring you Vatican articles about the Eucharist, Mariology, etc., and we can make them all invalid also.

 

VP, either you believe what your Pope writes, or you do not.  It has nothing to do with Bill Gray.  And, if you do not believe what your Pope writes -- then, you deny that he is infallible in church matters.   Is that true?

 

It seems that you are trying to straddle the fence -- because you do not want to believe that God views the homosexual lifestyle as an abomination -- even when your Pope confirms that this is God's view.

 

On which side of the fence will you take your stand -- with the gay marriage crowd, or with your Pope and God?

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

 

Originally Posted by Bill Gray:

Hi Vic,

 

Are you trying to claim that I have a vendetta against ALL YOU GIRLS?   Naw, I love and admire ladies.  Of course, I will admit there are a few here and there who are a pain in the behind.  But, if God loves them -- I love them.   And, that includes you, along with all the other girls.

 

By the way, I love your new avatar.  It really shows your feminine side.  Below is another one which seems to catch your essence.

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

LOL! Good job invictus-SITUHUBVSDHHPLPIHS!

 

If the truth be known TSBCTTTIHHT, HSAGBIHDRPIOGHT.

Bill finally admits someone can be born a homosexual it is a breakthrough.  So if someone can be born this way why is it ok for you to condemn them?  I am not gay nor do I like it shoved in my face but on the other hand they should not be persecuted.

Mr gray I have made myself clear In that I will not discuss nor debate catholic doctrine with you. Read my words. I am in complete agreement with our faith on this and all matters. And quite frankly my beliefs are not of your concern - you should focus on yourself and don't worry about me- I'm just fine and do not require nor desire your input on matters of which you have poor understanding . Kindly refrain from addressing posts to me, as I don't care to dialogue with you.

If two men want to open up to each other

and share a love more sweet and exquisite

than anything a man and woman could ever find together,

then that's their problem.

But when they try to bring a child into it,

I got to put my foot down!

Well, excuse me, but who are you to say

whether they should have kids?

A concerned American, Francine.

I've always said you can't raise normal children

in an abnormal environment.

You know what that'll do to society?

Girls playing with trucks, boys playing with dolls,

horses eating each other.

Yes, horses eating each other. Read the Bible!

 

Stan Smith-American Dad

@contendah, The article is about pastoral care of homosexuals- defining the acts as a sin and encouraging them to live in accordance. There is a difference between a homosexual person, and homosexual behavior. My stance on this has never wavered- Love the sinner, hate the sin. And, respectfully, I am nowhere near to be a "cafeteria catholic"...I do follow Catechesis to the best of my ability. Cheers , Veep. Xo

---

VP, my Friend,

 

If you do not want to dialogue with others -- then, why are you on a public forum?   You could just as easily dialogue via Private Messages with only those you choose.  But, when you let fly on an open forum -- it is open season to anyone who wants to respond. 

 

Now, if you post a Roman Catholic doctrine or tradition which I know to be unBiblical -- I WILL refute it.  If you do not want to read my response -- not a problem.  But, at least others, besides your small cabal of friends, will have the opportunity to read the truth.

 

So, believe me, dear lady -- it is no skin off my back if you do not respond when I refute your statements.   As a matter of fact, I prefer that -- for it makes my task of refuting false teaching much easier.

 

This just might work out just fine for both of us.  But, your Pope does say that the homosexual lifestyle is not Biblical and is a sin lifestyle.  If you don't agree with him -- that is your choice.

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

---

Hi Flyer,

 

Actually, I do not put any faith in the fact that anyone can be born homosexual.   I was just going along with the article which Crusty posted.  And, I do suppose that, possibly,  in 1 out of a million, maybe 1 out of a billion, births -- some strange birth defect might cause a child to THINK he/she had been born gay.  But, we have yet to hear of any "gay gene" being found.

 

My personal opinion, and from my observations through 75 years on this earth -- I still firmly believe that homosexuality is the result of family life gone wrong or societal/peer pressures. 

 

But, lets say, just for the fun of it -- that homosexuality could be caused by a birth defect.  Why should that birth defect have special laws legislated just for it -- and not for other birth defects or birth illnesses?

 

Gays have the same rights as you and me.  Every one can marry the person of their choice -- of the opposite sex.  

 

It still goes back to the same old tired logic.  If same-sex partners can marry -- why can't you or I have ten spouses?  If same-sex partners can marry -- why can't Farmer John marry his pet sheep or heifer?  If same-sex partners can marry -- why can't the pedophile marry the young child he/she loves and adores?  Why?  Because all of these are unnatural and are abominations -- in the eyes of normal society and in the eyes of God.

 

Should anyone with a birth defect, homosexual or not, be persecuted?  Absolutely not!

 

But, on the other hand, they should not have special laws and privileges given to them -- based upon their lifestyle.

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

I agree with the pope. I believe what the holy Roman Catholic church teaches. Jesus is King, He lives, He loves, He forgives! Everyone should meld themselves to God now. Cling to Jesus as your Lord and Savior before its too late. Say yes to Jesus!

There's no sin in having same s e x attraction. The sin is when one physically acts on that attraction.

______________

Pay no attention to that old man. He is a liar, a fool, & a wolf in sheep's clothing. If he can cause anger & hard feelings, he has done what the Devil wants him to do. This forum & our conversations would be much more enjoyable if Bill Gray is ignored. Let those that love to argue with him & read his nonsense, have at it but it would be best if you just ignore his post & not read them. I read around his post, & enjoy the forum much more.

---

Hi David,

 

I could not agree with you more.  What you have said agrees with what VP wrote earlier -- love the sinner, hate the sin.   And, this is what I have been writing here for almost six years.

 

But, I would go one step further.  Yes, it is a sin when one gives in to homosexual desires; but, if that person has become a Christian believer -- that person is still be a believer, a child of God.  But, he/she is a person who needs to acknowledge and own his/her sin and seek forgiveness from the Lord.  And, to seek  strength from the Lord to overcome those desires.

 

Yet, the person who chooses to live an active homosexual lifestyle -- is following the world and not Jesus Christ -- and is not a Christian believer.

 

There is no sin that God will not forgive -- if a person repents, turns from that sin lifestyle, and turns to follow Jesus Christ.  Will that person who has become a believer commit that sin again?  Possibly, for turning from that lifestyle does not necessarily remove the desire.  As a matter of fact, I would say that, for many, the desire never dies.  However, acting upon that desire can be brought under control.

 

And, that is what I believe your Pope was suggesting in the letter/article I posted -- that it is up to the churches, both Roman Catholic and Protestant, to minister to those lost in an unBiblical lifestyle.   And, that lifestyle does not necessarily have to be the homosexual lifestyle.  It could be a lifestyle of any sin -- adultery, fornication, stealing, cheating, any number of sin lifestyles.  And, as the Pope suggested to the Bishops -- the churches need to minister to these people.   I agree with him, and you, completely.

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

My personal opinion on the matter is one which considers what I believe the Bible/Scriptures teach about what it is to be Human.  Man/Woman/Mankind/Human is to be born from flesh and also a created inner spirit/soul.  The flesh is sinful and born imperfect and corrupted, stained if you will, but the flesh also dies yet the spirit/soul remains.  This, I believe, is but one aspect of what it means to be made in the "image" of God for I believe and scriptures teach that God is Spirit.  

 

That said I also believe that after physical death our inner spirit/soul will be our eternal state and although we will be given a glorified future state body I do not believe those bodies will incorporate a sexual orientation, neither male or female.  Homosexuality, I believe, as Scriptures teach, is sinful and against God's will but is a sin the same as any other sin with one difference.  The difference is the same as any other sexual sin such as adultery in that it involves the human body which is, for the Christian, the temple or container of God's Holy Spirit therefore the Christian who engages in a sexual sin sins against his own body, the temple of the Holy Spirit so in that respect, and that respect only, sexual sins, including homosexuality and adultery are potentially more damaging sins, to the Christian and with regards to the Christian.

 

As to whether a person is born a homosexual or not, again my own opinion, is that they are not born that way.  I do not believe any of us have any sexual orientation or knowledge at birth but we become sexually aware later on in our life in the same way that I do not believe people are born racist or born thieves or born murderers.  It is but an opinion but then so is everyone else's statements based upon their own basis or circumstances.  Sexual attraction is a function of the human flesh and apart from the inner soul/spirit which, again I believe, God makes/creates and places within the human body at some point after conception.  Therefore I cannot accept, myself, anyone who says God made me this way for those things of the flesh are made and inherited of the flesh and fleshly nature whereas the inner spirit/soul comes from God and is a special creation and makes us separate and different from the animal, insect, plant or other species and groups of life.

Scriptural references available upon request

---

I realize that those who advocate evolution would think differently and although my objections to evolution don't lie or are not based in Religion I do find it interesting that among all life forms humans are the only ones that seem to have and are driven by a conscience.  It is the human creation that looks to clothe it's nakedness and defines a moral code dealing with our own nakedness whereas none of the other animals do this.  Monkeys who many say are man's closest evolutional link don't do this, they don't go looking for leaves to cover their nakedness.  If you believe in evolution how does this inconsistency and difference occur?  I realize that's another deviation from this topic but one which I none the less thought of in the context of thinking about human sexuality therefore I included it with this post but below a separation line to isolate it from the other thought regarding this particular topic/thread.

The humans "habit" of clothing themselves first began for protection against the cold, and other elements/"things", after they lost their "coats of fur/hair" and long before "man" deemed the naked body "sinful". It certainly had nothing to do with morality. Sometimes even a little "learning" could go a long way. 

                                                     **********

 

Chimpanzees learn, perform cognitive and creative tasks, and have a better memory then any other animal. They can perform sign language to communicate with humans. Chimps have been observed using advanced knowledge of tools - building what they need from what they have in creative and adaptive ways. They have show ability in thinking ahead by using tactical attack maneuvers, such as flanking their prey. They often use mental manipulation within their families. In 2006 it was shown that chimps share 98% of the same genetic DNA as humans. Recently, chimpanzees have been seen teaching sign language to their infants without human interference.

 

http://www.ranker.com/list/the...earth/analise.dubner

We/ humans never lost are "fur".  If, and thats a big "if", humans evolved from apes, we would not have lost are fur.  

evolutionary changes should help a species survive, losing fur didn't help the human. As soon as we supposedly lost our fur, we had to run around killing furry animals to put their fur on our backs to stay warm and survive...... 

BTW,  people that have kept/raised chimps in their homes, say the chimps take on "human" characteristics, almost to the point of "becoming human", and do almost everything their human "family" does, including "communicating" with their human family. As stated before, even a tiny bit of "learning' on some people's part would go a long way.

 

Also, did humans alter the amount of melanin in their skin as a result of shedding all this hair? After all, with less hair, these ape-like creatures would be much more susceptible to skin damage from the Sun.

Excellent point David.   IF Evolution or the process of evolution is a process of adapting to the environment in order to survive and advance the species and from what evolution seems to teach that man came from ape form then we certainly had fur/hair over our bodies at one point yet somehow through this evolutionary process the human evolution decided it didn't need this covering exposing us to the elements so much more.  Surely evolution of the human didn't just happen in warm climates where mankind would not need a fur coating so a reasonable question to the evolutionist would be to explain this process and occurrence given the thought of Natural Selection of the fittest and strongest through time.  Why did man/human end up as he/she did losing all the hair while still having the elements to contend with so that we would have to find and develop clothing?  

 

I personally think clothing was not just created or fashioned in order to provide protection from the elements but to conceal man/woman's nakedness and there was some innate thought of morality or right and wrong associated with man/woman being naked.  Again I'm not trying to argue God or Religion but rather IF a person advocates evolution then that is one question that they need to reconcile and be able to address.  To say that mankind fashioned clothing for the sole purpose of protection from the elements and then to accept evolution and/or natural selection as a process whereby mankind or species adapt and better itself based upon the elements and environment it's in should explain why man even had to fashion clothing as protection from the elements when he/it supposedly had hair/fur to start with.   Maybe now the claim will be that man didn't descend from apes but if not then what did he descend from and where is that fossil record?   Also how is it that mankind/humans alone were able to fashion or feel the need to clothe themselves as additional protection from what nature had equipped them for?  

 

One may argue that other species were better equipped than man to contend with the elements they were in but in doing so they are insinuating that man is the only species that did not "evolve" into a more competent form.  In other words we evolved backwards in this respect.  Yet another question for advocates of Evolution that feel so sure in their theory, to answer or explain.  In my opinion mind you.

 

===========

Yes, humans did indeed lose their "fur".  The need to wear "clothes" or animal furs came about because humans lost their protective covering. It had nothing at all to do with "morals". And "creationists" are the only ones that makes the (false) claim that people that study/teach evolution believe humans evolved from apes. 

 

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolut...brary/faq/cat02.html

 

***********************************************

As far as evolution supposed to make things "better", I'd say just do some research and read for yourself just what evolution is. Things change, either other things adapt to those changes, evolve, or they die off.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faq...tion-definition.html

==========

 

There is no need to have me put in the links, when all you have to do is read it yourself. If you did, no offense intended, you would have the answers to your questions. NO ONE is saying man came from apes. That is a lie the creationists keep spreading. 

Man did not evolve from apes. Man and apes had a common ancestor. The lines diverged thousands of years ago. You people are just too ignorant for words.

___

Those allegedly domesticated chimps also have from time to time, been reported as chewing off the faces of humans and ripping humans literally limb from limb.  You seem very eager to accept without question what  people who have raised chimps "say" about their hairy house guests.  That does not seem consistent with the way you normally raise questions concerning these kinds of claims.

 

The DNA "similarity" between humans and chimps is not as "similar" as some think.  Though the gene patterns of two species may similar, the biochemistry of gene expression can vary considerably.  It is an  oversimplification to assert a particular degree of similarity based solely on conventional DNA test results.  

Those allegedly domesticated chimps also have from time to time, been reported as chewing off the faces of humans and ripping humans literally limb from limb.  You seem very eager to accept without question what  people who have raised chimps "say" about their hairy house guests.  That does not seem consistent with the way you normally raise questions concerning these kinds of claims.

==============

Eager to accept what exactly? First of all they have video after video after video of the chimps doing what they claim, along with all sorts of witnesses (friends, neighbors, vets, other family) to the actions of the chimps. And if I remember correctly, plenty of scientists will tell you the same thing. Of course you, like bill and a couple of others, think you know more than the experts that have worked with the chimps all their working lives. Secondly, I NEVER said the chimps "became human" and wouldn't attack a person. I said "ALMOST to the point of becoming human". See the difference einstein? That would be silly since we read about attacks happening all the time, and I certainly wouldn't take one into my home. What questions have I raised about people that have chimps? What's wrong now? Do you want to start slaughtering chimps because someone's home isn't their "natural habitat" and they might attack those people? Take that up with the ones that own the chimps. Oh, and by the way, you might want to be careful if you have children or grandchildren, because there have been thousands of reports of children attacking their parents/grandparents, killing them, sometimes even cutting them into tiny pieces.

_________________

Bill, whether or not you put your faith in the fact, it is indeed a fact.  That you seek a single "gay gene" as proof is the same misguided, and ignorant idea that there is a single "missing link" in evolution.  In the case of homosexuality, no "strange birth defect" is involved, only simple, yet complex, changes in hormones along with a genetic propensity.  And the number is more like 10-15%, not 1 in a billion.

 

Your stupidity knows no bounds. 

_____________

You slept through biology class, right? 

*****************************************

No, I took biology in college and did very well.

Humans do not share a common ancestor with apes.

________________

Your whole post shows a complete lack of understanding of how evolution works.  Time for a refresher course.

I personally think clothing was not just created or fashioned in order to provide protection from the elements but to conceal man/woman's nakedness and there was some innate thought of morality or right and wrong associated with man/woman being naked. 

===================

 Maybe now the claim will be that man didn't descend from apes but if not then what did he descend from and where is that fossil record?

 

==============================

Maybe NOW the claim will be that man didn't descend from apes? Sheesh! NO ONE said man descended from apes to start with. 

Where is that fossil record? Really dude? I mean, really?? Ever heard the expression "needle in a haystack"? Try needle in the entire world.

==================================

FOSSILIZATION AND ADAPTATION:
ACTIVITIES IN PALEONTOLOGY

INTRODUCTION

AS THE concepts of time, past life, and fossils are often difficult for children to comprehend and as many of the National Parks and Monuments have important paleontological resources, Fossil Butte National Monument developed a fossil education curriculum guide designed to aid teachers presenting these principles to students in the second and third grades. The following activities are modified from that guide (Leite, M. B. and Breithaupt, B. H., 1994, Teaching Paleontology in the National Parks and Monuments: A curriculum guide for teachers of the second and third grade levels: National Park Service, Fossil Butte National Monument, Kemmerer, WY 103 p.). For more information on this curriculum guide distributed though the National Park Service, please contact Ms. Marsha ***nant, Fossil Butte National Monument, P.O. Box 592, Kemmerer, WY 83101. 

 

 

OVERVIEW

How does a living thing become a fossil? The mysterious processes by which evidence of past life is preserved are explored in these exercises. By thinking about and participating in some simulated sedimentary processes, children will be able to remove much of the mystery behind fossils and fossilization. These exercises introduce the concept that fossils are remains or traces of ancient living things.  They will also begin to think about how RARE an event fossilization is.

 

Message: Not all parts of animals become fossilized. It may not be possible to know some details of what an ancient animal or plant was like because many parts of the anatomy may not become fossils.
Materials: Drawings of horse and Stegosaurus skeletons. (Figures 1 and 2)
Discussion:  Fossilization is a RARE event. The chances of a given individual being preserved in the fossil record are VERY SMALL. Some organisms, however, have better chances than others because of the composition of their skeletons or where they lived. This also applies to the various parts of organisms. For example, plants and vertebrates (animals with bones) are made up of different parts that can separate after death. The different parts can be transported by currents to different locations and be preserved separately. A fossil toe bone might be found at one place and a fossil rib at another location. We could assume that they are from different animals when, in fact, they came from the same one.

 Much information is LOST in the fossilization process. Think, for example, of a vertebrate (such as ourselves). Much of what we consider important about our own biology is in the soft tissues, such as skin, hair, and internal organs. These characteristics would usually be unknown in the fossil state, because most of the time only bones and teeth are preserved (there are exceptional cases where soft parts are preserved). Bones and teeth are not always preserved together. This exercise is designed to get children to think about the quality of information that comes from the fossil record.

 

http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/fosrec/Breithaupt2.html

"I personally think clothing was not just created or fashioned in order to provide protection from the elements but to conceal man/woman's nakedness and there was some innate thought of morality or right and wrong associated with man/woman being naked."

__________

Readers of National Geographic will disagree.

Such short and dogmatic statements that it seems you have diverged from our past contributor Jimi Hendrix.  Then again a simplistic remark like that is surely warranted when you cannot adequately address a question regarding the basis of your belief or a challenge to it such as was stated.  

 when you cannot adequately address a question regarding the basis of your belief or a challenge to it such as was stated.  

================

It's been addressed, over and over. There is NO challenge. It is what it is.

_____________

Often, the truth is short and dogmatic.  If you want reams and reams to read, it is readily available in textbooks, and from rep utable sites online.

....sometimes when things seem incompatible with a faith, it is wise to just concede that we are not supposed to know and have a full understanding. If we did, we'd be God. It's enough for me to know that God is a Pre existing Diety who had a hand in creation. I can readily admit that I don't know how , when ( although clearly > 2000 years) or under what circumstances. It really doesn't matter to me. I think of course, there are times when science and faith seem incompatible. That's ok- because both are important in MY life, and I'll just have to accept the fact that not all things make perfect sense. Is that a cop out? Maybe. But it is what gives me peace, and allows me to live the life I choose. cheers

How do you pick which parts of science to accept and which parts to discard?

I don't think it is ever acceptable to refute something that is backed by objective cold fact. Like the age of the earth, for example.

Vic,

 

Calling homosexuals "deformed" or "ill" might be to miss the point.  A normal human population will contain a certain element of homosexuals.  Always has been that way.

 

Sort of like left handers.  A normal human population will include a certain number of people who are just different in that way.

 

FWIW, my observation has been that most people are born straight, some are born homosexual, and then some are born wobblers who can go either or both ways depending on upbringing and environment.

 

DF

I didn't miss the point I was just making a point

If anyone can be born deformed, they can be born homo***.

 

That is easy!   Since God created all the sciences -- those things which agree with God we accept; those which disagree with God, we reject.  Simple.

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

But if God created all the sciences, then there is no part He disagrees with.  So picking and choosing which parts of science you reject is no better than picking and choosing which parts of the Bible you reject.

Can someone who knows everything about everything back me up on this?

****************

I don't know anything about anything but I know you hit the nail dead center

of it's head.

Bill doesn't believe in God's ability to write the Bible, so he's going to help him.

I'm amazed that it was such a short post. Usually "Oh no, it's mr. bill", makes posts are long rambling and nonsensical, full of copy/paste and re-hashed "stories" and poorly concealed hatred for anyone not like him. This one was short and nonsensical. His motto: 

"If you can't impress them with your intelligence, then dazzle them with your bull."

 

But, even that doesn't work for him. Same old story of that "it's not meant for us to understand" god he worships. One minute god is everywhere and sees/controls everything, next minute, god can't be everywhere, and when something bad happens, which is all the time, it's those sneaky humans that caused it. You know, those sneaky humans that he supposedly made in his image. Are god's quality control people slacking off?

Well, if you read the description of that god in the bible, you're inclined to believe that those people doing that awful stuff actually are "made in his image". If that god had actually existed he'd be a pretty nasty piece of work.

Where was that god when the things, linked below, were happening? Was he tied up laughing at some baby whose mother or father dumped a bowl of spaghetti noodles over it's head so they could take a silly picture for bill to post on here over and over?

I can bet old bill won't be posting happy smiling pictures of this baby. Yep, "jesus loves the little children". And think, this woman and her boyfriend are made in bill's god's image. And as bill would say, "god don't make no junk". And, in prison, some good church folks will "convert" them, they'll "repent" and be welcomed into their god's wonderful kingdom. Don't it just warm your heart???

                                                    ***************************

Mother, 29, and her boyfriend, 62, 'repeatedly raped her baby from birth until she was 18 months old'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...d.html#ixzz23iWY7lPh

______________

Backasswards as always.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/tr...apart-191744167.html

 

Reunited, and it feels so good. After three years apart, lowland gorilla brothers Kesho, 13, and Alf, 9, were brought back together at the Longleat Safari and Adventure Park in Wiltshire, England. And if there was ever any doubt about whether or not gorillas experience joy, now there's photographic proof.

Kesho and Alf recognized each other instantly and immediately began patting their silver backs, hugging, and shaking each other's hands. Ian Redmond, the founder and chairman of the Ape Alliance, said, "What you're seeing is exactly what you think you're seeing. Two intelligent social mammals, who were separate, are pleased to see each other again and play together."

Kesho and Alf were born at the Dublin Zoo. They were separated when Kesho, the older and larger of the two, was taken to London Zoo as part of a breeding program. According to zookeepers at the Dublin Zoo and the Longleat staff, there were concerns about the two brothers being able to recognize each other and being hesitant to play together because Kesho weighs twice as much as Alf. But those fears were quickly put to rest. As soon as the brothers saw each other, all they could do was interact playfully and with joy.

The two brothers also have another sibling they can add to the mix: 6-year-old Evindi, who also lives at the Longleat park. Now, they can all be one big happy family.

Hi Jennifer,

 

That is interesting!  That proves that we are all descended from dogs -- for when we come home, our dog gets all excited, runs up to greet us, and wants to play.  And, it does not matter if we have been gone for just a few hours -- or for a long time.

 

We had one dog a few years ago that we had to give away to a family who moved to San Diego.  Several years later, they moved back to this area and when Dory went to visit -- the dog, Bo, got so excited when he saw her.  Bo ran up and jumped into Dory's arms.   Sounds sort of like your apes.

 

So, help me out here, Jennifer.  Are we descended from apes or dogs?   Both seem to behave the same.   Now I am confused.  Should I grab a banana -- or just bark?

 

Oh, well, I suppose life will just have to go on.  But, I am sure happy to know that I am descended from Adam and Eve -- even if they did blow it for all of us.

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

 

Sometimes I forget how stupid (yes I said stupid) Bill Gray can be. He is beyond ridiculous. Does anyone here actually believe he thinks he is "saving souls"? I have a hard time even believing that he sincere at all. I think he may just be a old pervert that enjoys coming to this forum and stirring things up. He is obsessed with pedophiles and those that have sex with animals. He says its the same thing as homosexual love. Which is another one of his obsessions.

 

 

An Important Note To BILL GRAY...This is my simple religion. There is no need for a temple; no need for complicated philosophy. Our own brain, and our own heart is our temple.

You show great contempt and hatred! I hope you get to heaven, before the Devil knows you're dead!!

 

 

         

 

   

 

Natgeo  2012 photo contest winner, one of 12.  This is my favorite, but not the top winner. More at link below NatGeo 2012 Photo winners

_________

If you read about Narcissistic Personality Disorder, you will find Bill Gray. He gets on here & "appears" to be making fun of everyone on here but at the same time he's trying to build himself up. That's what people with NPD have to do, it's the only way they can feel good about themself. 

What's sad is that there is people on this forum that actually believe him to be a Christian.

Andromeda said it well when he/she said he/she hopes Bill gets to heaven before the Devil knows he's dead!! But the Devil will know because Bill is working for Him. If there is such a thing as Hell, the day Billy takes his last breath, he's going to bust Hell wide open.

 

******************************************

an indignant Billie

 

___

Nope--the 10 to 15% figure just does not cut it.  The corrupt Dr. Kinsey generated that kind of estimate in his thoroughly discredited estimate of the extent of homosexuality.  Modern studies place the percentage in the human population at 1 to 3 percent--way lower than the 10% so often, and so erroneously, used by homosexuals to exaggerate their numbers and boost their influence.

That's true

Well gee, if there are such a few of them why not just let them get married and stop worrying about it? How about the ones "still in the closet"?

____________

Okay.  Heck, let's say it is 1 in 1000.  Still not 1 in a billion.  My point is still made.  Just to reiterate the point: Bill's stupidity knows no bounds.

___

NOT "[s]ort of like left-handers."  Left handedness is NOT a behavioral phenomenon.  Homosexuality IS.

__________

This only proves that you know nothing about left-handedness. 

___

Not so.  Why, some of my best friends are left-handed.

You will find that left handedness is due to the right side of the brain being the "dominant" side.  This  is not the norm.  When the right side is dominant the person tends to be more creative, musical, mathematical, and disorganized.  Statistics show left-handed people are more likely to be schizophrenic, alcoholic, delinquent, dyslexic, and have Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis, as well as mental disabilities.

 

Saying that left-handedness is not a behavioral phenomenon is inaccurate.

You are missing the point altogether.  Deformities are random.  Left handedness and homosexuality are predictable, normal parts of any human population.

 

DF

******************************************

 

Deep fried Brain???

___

Has the lab tested that specimen yet, and if so, are your kidneys functioning OK?

i didn't say God created homosexuals, or people with any other deviant behaviors. he created all people, we created our own lustful desires of the flesh. you are absolutely right, He wouldn't create what He says is an abomination. that's why we can be sure he didn't 'create' the homosexual lifestyle. 

 

just because i disagree with you is no reason to attempt to discredit me, and calling me 'addled' doesn't make it so. i am not offended, and i will not reply with such a comment about you. 

 

_________________

So God creates homosexuals.  He creates all people; homosexuals are a subset of all people; therefore, God creates homosexuals.  Assuming your premise is correct, the logic is irrefutable.

Crusty, i appreciate your input, but you are assuming 'facts' that aren't in my post. apparently we disagree on what 'homosexual' is. i believe it's a chosen lifestyle, not God-given DNA, because God would have no reason to create what He defines as an 'abomination'. He is the Creator of the entire universe. we are created innocent and pure,  but what we choose to become in it is another matter entirely. His creation is good, and anything other than that has been tainted by man. there's really not much to discuss when we disagree on the very basis of the subject. 

________________

You would be wrong.  The science tells us that sexual preference is determined in fetal development with a genetic propensity.  As long as you dispute science, we will indeed disagree.  We also disagree on God's input into the fertilization process.

 

I'm curious, do you eat pork?

As far as my opinion on the matter of humankind birth (male and/or female) I believe Scriptures give us enough insight and information/material to understand that being human consist of a physical/fleshly body, which is brought about by the physical/sexual union of two other humans (male & female).   Within that fleshly physical body is (in the image of God) a soul/spirit that differentiates us from all other life species/creation.  That soul/spirit is a entity that is eternal in nature (as is God) and spirt, not flesh (as is God) and also will be what last and continues after the death of the flesh/physical body.   I believe that whereas the body/flesh is created by the union of human flesh (sperm/egg) the spirit/soul is created by God and is contained within the human body and after death is apart and leaves the human/flesh body.  

 

Whether you believe homosexuality is a part of being born or from birth then if it is (which I personally believe it isn't) it is a product of the flesh and not the spirit and it is not something that God has made a person be.  When it comes to belief one way or the other, regarding whether it's in the DNA and therefore you are born with it or not is a matter of personal opinion of the person based upon varying other personal beliefs.  We are all born into sinful flesh and not born into a Spiritually perfect body so we all have our own problems or fallacies in the flesh and one is no greater than another for the end result is we all are in need of a mediator or Savior with respect to God and God's ultimate verdict upon Sin.  Again mind you that is my own personal belief/opinion.

What amazes me-IF they do believe everything is a "choice" why don't they choose to be better people? 

I don't believe sexuality or sexual attraction is a thing that is born in anyone.  You are either assuming or saying that a child has a sexual attraction toward another even as a toddler abut I believe that sexual attraction begins later in life as children grow and become aware of their sexuality.  I never accepted Freud's contention that a child sexually envies his mother or father for I don't think that sexuality is even a part of their life until later in their early years.   IF you, or others, want to believe otherwise in order to somehow rationalize or justify your own opinion then have at it but to make dogmatic statements of fact is just being gullible of something someone is telling you.

 

Scientific fact?  You yourself know that scientific facts change from time to time depending on what the particular subject is.  People do research all the time and come up with various conflicting conclusions.  One persons scientific fact is another's conjecture.  Like I said if you feel comfortable and all warm and fuzzy with your opinion that's great, for you, but I'm not accepting it and I'll continue to believe otherwise.

 

Scientific "facts" "change" because science advances-keeps going, searching. One discovery leads to another and so forth. And it is ludicrous to say people "choose" to be homosexual. If you believe that you must live in fear that one day you, your children, life partner, will up and "decide" they want to be gay.

___________

Who said anything about Freud? While one study doesn't make a scientific fact, many do.  There is a difference between sexual attraction and sexual orientation.  So answer the question, one day you just decided that you would choose women over men, when was that, and why?  Until that day you could have gone either way?  When did you pick your eye color and handedness?

Aren't left handed people evil? So of course any good christian would choose to be right handed, and also make their kiddies use their right hand.

 

Of course, certain behaviors are genetically part of the species.

 

DF

hg> actually i'm vegetarian.

 

_____________

Interesting.  Are you a Christian Scientist?  Why not?

 

Okay, vegetarian.  Do you wear any clothes with mixed fibers?  Have any tattoos? 

So you're a vegetarian-but do you eat pork? Many vegetarians do. Something tells me you fibbed so you could "skirt" the question.

______________

Read Leviticus lately?

 

As for not being a Christian Scientist, why not?  If you believe God over science, that is the logical path.

 

That is about as childish as your number game.  But, I do suppose some never outgrow the sandbox.

 

Regarding your questions above:  Research "Law versus Grace" and you will have your answer.  Then, their will be no more need for childish questions or games.   Good luck!

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

================

You didn't confuse me, it's you that's confused. 

___________________

The questions aren't childish, Bill.  They are at the heart of showing the ridiculousness of your fundamentalist nonsense.   When you come up with a non-conflicted answer on topics like the literalness of the Bible, 6k year old earth, and your distorted take on homosexuality, then we can discuss "Law and Grace".  Until then, good luck!

 

Until then, just for the fun of it, I'll ask you one more time, does Leviticus apply or not?

Number systems are used around the world in a multitude of situations.  They are designed to save time and promote accurate communication.  That I recognized a situation where a numbering system would work, and applied one, is somehow childish. I don't think so.

 

The real issue here is that Bill is just angry that the repetitiousness of his postings have been spotted, and that it is now quite obvious that he has absolutely nothing new, or even meaningful, to add to any conversation on the topic of religion.

 

"Childishness" is using the word "duh" in serious conversation, posting infantile cartoons, and not embracing a system that would save a large amount of time (a resource that Bill is running out of minute by minute) for more productive use.

 

Wah, wah, wah is all I'm hearing from Bill.

____________

Oh, and #9 would have been sufficient here.

No Best, I do not think that left handed people are evil.  I am left handed and I am not evil. Cute! Yes they use to make their kids use their right hand. Some teachers when I was in school would slap the left hand if they caught the child using it. I have even heard that they would tie the left arm behind the childs back to keep them from using it. I have also heard that left handed people have a neat and pretty handwriting. But really, I don't believe that it is evil to be left handed.

************************

 

My post was to show how superstitious and ignorant people were, and even still are about some things.

 

Yes, every book, every verse in the Bible counts -- and without them, no theology is truly valid.   However, to truly understand how this applies, one must understand the concept of "Law versus Grace."

 

And, it is very obvious that you, either, do not understand "Law versus Grace" -- in which case you can fix that problem by finding a solid Christ-centered, Bible-teaching church and becoming involved in their Bible studies.

 

Or, you do understand "Law versus Grace" and just want to continue playing your childish games as you emulate your atheist friends and comrades. 

 

Either way, my Friend, you are in need of serious spiritual help.   Do yourself a favor and find that church I mention above.

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

This is a #6 and a big fat #7.  So do you eat pork?  You say Leviticus applies, then it doesn't.  Can't be both, regardless of your fundamentalist runaround.  For the record (again), my house is in order.  You need to worry about yours and your mental health.  You obviously have Alzheimer's.

Hi Crusty,

 

May I make a suggestion?  Why don't you go seclude yourself for a while, take your childish questions with you -- and, WHEN you learn the meaning of "Law versus Grace" -- come back and we will be able to have an adult dialogue.

 

Now, my Friend, if, for whatever reason, you do not have the ability to understand the concept of "Law versus Grace" -- please tell me so we can get you the help you need.  If you will admit that you cannot grasp that concept -- then, I will be happy to help you.

 

So, what is it?  Are you just going to stick you head in the sand?  Or, will you admit that you CANNOT understand?  Or, will you finally admit that you are just playing a childish game and are feverishly attempting to emulate your atheist idols?  You tell us which is the true situation with you.

 

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

 

Bill

.

#s..6,,7 & 9

_____________________

#9.  If you don't like my questions, you don't have to answer them.  Oh, wait.... you never do.  I'm here as long as you are, Bill, pointing out the ridiculous contradictions and nonsense of fundamentalist Christians such as yourself.  Get used to it.

 

I understand your grace vs law argument.  I don't agree with the twisted, convoluted, and fallacious logic it takes to make your case. 

 

The rest of your post is just a big fat #8. 

 

Have a wonderfully blissed day, Bill.

___________

See how much time he could have saved?