Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Jor-el

Homosexuality, sin, choice or biology?

2,645 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Paranoid Android

Well that's your choice to do.

The Q document? What's that?

The Q document hypothesis (see also This site, a little easier to understand in layman's terms, I don't propose to understand everything written in that first link, so I don't expect other layman to be able to perfectly understand it either) is a hypothetical text that was essentially a "sayings source", a collection of the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth. This document was used as a primary source by the authors of Mark, Matthew, and Luke (the two-source hypothesis adds that Matthew and Luke had access to Mark's writings; there is also a more detailed Four-Source hypothesis which incorporates the two-source hypothesis but adds that Matthew and Luke both had access to further hypothetical texts (designated M and L respectively), though the evidence for M is much shakier than the evidence for L.

Of course, this is only a theory based on the fact that the Q document (as well as M and L) is now lost to history. We have no surviving copy of such a text (though some fragments of text may be representative of that as opposed to gospel texts). However, based on textual criticism the majority of scholars accept that such a text did originally exist. Of course there are always dissenters, but they represent a minority.

Perhaps you can explain why homosexuals are created and their sexuality is an inbuilt trait and why god would NOT sanction them?

Not all actions that we may naturally have as inborn traits are beneficial or acceptable. Your comment makes sense outside of the context of our discussion, but we're talking about Jesus' teaching, and if Jesus was the son of God why would he not discuss it if his Father was explicitly against it? I'm not talking about whether it is "sinful" or not. I'm talking about whether Jesus thought it was sinful or not. You think my reasoning is illogical, I just want to know why.

No I don't expect you to give a dogmatic answer. What I do expect, is for you to realise what a sticky situation it makes and how making victims sinners does not come off very well. And that's just one example of the sort of situation that it makes. Making victims sinful is like saying a victim is guilty for a crime committed against them.

I do realise that. I'm not turning victims into sinners. I'm making sin into something sinful, and accepting that sometimes it poses problems even for those people who were innocent. To use an extreme example, a person engages in unprotected sex and becomes infected with HIV/AIDS. Seven years later they are in a car crash and the attending paramedic accidentally gets infected blood from the victim into their system and becomes infected themselves - the paramedic did nothing wrong, but because of someone else's sin, they now have to live with negative consequences for the rest of her life. In saying this, I'm not advocating that a person who gets out of an abusive relationship is "sinning" for doing so, just accepting that sin has turned what should have been something beautiful into something that is very very ugly.

I have no absolute answer for tough situations. If such a situation ever arose and I was in a position to help, my best advice to me would be to simply help them find a way out of abuse, their own way. If they want to split and never remarry, I'll support them. If they remarry, I'll support them. If they don't even choose to divorce but simply live apart for the rest of their life I'll support that too. I can't advocate them staying in a harmful situation because that would be ethically wrong to leave someone in a dangerous position - but ultimately it has to be their choice to leave, I can't force them.

Edited by Paranoid Android

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Right Wing

Exactly. IMO, it is not a choice. Otherwise after the abuse I suffered from my ex would have 'turned me gay', but, no, I don't find women attractive, I still find (some) men attractive. It is something they are born with. I am friends with a lesbian couple and they are wonderful, caring and open hearted women. To look at them and think they deserve to die because they don't fit in with Christianity's view makes me ill. Until we stop with all the hatred and anger over something that doesn't directly affect us, we will never be a healthy society. Does what gay people do in their beds really affect you? Really? Or is it your own curiosity that bothers you?

Enough of the pseudo-science. Science says homosexuality is caused by four things -

Genetics - Some peoples hormones arent in the right ratios so they dont end up getting an all male or all female brain.

Culture - Parental values can mould youngsters into homosexuals.

Psychosis - Mental trauma (attempted suicide, abusive relationship, etc) can cause homosexuality.

Chemicals/Drugs - Rewires the hormones and brains of individuals.

The Bible says it isnt a sin to have homosexual thoughts but it is if you act on them. We would call a murderer evil and lock them up even if their genetics made them prone to violant outbursts, even if their parents were toxic, even if they were psychotic or if their crime arose from them being off their heads on drugs.

The murderer is still expected to practice self-restraint as God requires those with homosexual urges to practice self-restraint.

Edited by Giant Killer B

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
darkmoonlady

Using the bible as justification to be prejudice against homosexuality is hypocritical in that the bible doesn't condone using your "handmaid" to have kids with if your wife is barren, stoning people for various reasons, slavery, rape is never condemned other than paying the person you rape off, it goes on and on. I also know that every christian on earth doesn't follow the rules of Leviticus yet uses on to diminish the rights of others.

It also says in the same section of the bible it is an equal abomination to sleep on the same bed as a woman having her period, eat shellfish or wear mixed fabrics. If I do all

three do I bring about the apocalypse? Get me a motel bed, a shrimp cocktail and some polyester pants and see what happens...

I'm being silly but it goes to show you that the "logic" that certain christians apply to the sin basis of homosexuality cannot be ignored for the other equal sins they commit every day and don't care one whit about. (and just because a tiny percentage follow those rules, ok then THOSE people can think homosexuality is wrong) but there are plenty of other christians eating shrimp and sleeping in the same bed together on mixed fabrics. It just shows the absurdity of the hatred toward homosexuals based on the bible..

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy

The Q document hypothesis (see also This site, a little easier to understand in layman's terms, I don't propose to understand everything written in that first link, so I don't expect other layman to be able to perfectly understand it either) is a hypothetical text that was essentially a "sayings source", a collection of the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth. This document was used as a primary source by the authors of Mark, Matthew, and Luke (the two-source hypothesis adds that Matthew and Luke had access to Mark's writings; there is also a more detailed Four-Source hypothesis which incorporates the two-source hypothesis but adds that Matthew and Luke both had access to further hypothetical texts (designated M and L respectively), though the evidence for M is much shakier than the evidence for L.

Of course, this is only a theory based on the fact that the Q document (as well as M and L) is now lost to history. We have no surviving copy of such a text (though some fragments of text may be representative of that as opposed to gospel texts). However, based on textual criticism the majority of scholars accept that such a text did originally exist. Of course there are always dissenters, but they represent a minority.

Not all actions that we may naturally have as inborn traits are beneficial or acceptable. Your comment makes sense outside of the context of our discussion, but we're talking about Jesus' teaching, and if Jesus was the son of God why would he not discuss it if his Father was explicitly against it? I'm not talking about whether it is "sinful" or not. I'm talking about whether Jesus thought it was sinful or not. You think my reasoning is illogical, I just want to know why.

I do realise that. I'm not turning victims into sinners. I'm making sin into something sinful, and accepting that sometimes it poses problems even for those people who were innocent. To use an extreme example, a person engages in unprotected sex and becomes infected with HIV/AIDS. Seven years later they are in a car crash and the attending paramedic accidentally gets infected blood from the victim into their system and becomes infected themselves - the paramedic did nothing wrong, but because of someone else's sin, they now have to live with negative consequences for the rest of her life. In saying this, I'm not advocating that a person who gets out of an abusive relationship is "sinning" for doing so, just accepting that sin has turned what should have been something beautiful into something that is very very ugly.

I have no absolute answer for tough situations. If such a situation ever arose and I was in a position to help, my best advice to me would be to simply help them find a way out of abuse, their own way. If they want to split and never remarry, I'll support them. If they remarry, I'll support them. If they don't even choose to divorce but simply live apart for the rest of their life I'll support that too. I can't advocate them staying in a harmful situation because that would be ethically wrong to leave someone in a dangerous position - but ultimately it has to be their choice to leave, I can't force them.

Pa, well said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
shadowhive

The Q document hypothesis (see also This site, a little easier to understand in layman's terms, I don't propose to understand everything written in that first link, so I don't expect other layman to be able to perfectly understand it either) is a hypothetical text that was essentially a "sayings source", a collection of the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth. This document was used as a primary source by the authors of Mark, Matthew, and Luke (the two-source hypothesis adds that Matthew and Luke had access to Mark's writings; there is also a more detailed Four-Source hypothesis which incorporates the two-source hypothesis but adds that Matthew and Luke both had access to further hypothetical texts (designated M and L respectively), though the evidence for M is much shakier than the evidence for L.

Of course, this is only a theory based on the fact that the Q document (as well as M and L) is now lost to history. We have no surviving copy of such a text (though some fragments of text may be representative of that as opposed to gospel texts). However, based on textual criticism the majority of scholars accept that such a text did originally exist. Of course there are always dissenters, but they represent a minority.

Ah, ok.

Not all actions that we may naturally have as inborn traits are beneficial or acceptable. Your comment makes sense outside of the context of our discussion, but we're talking about Jesus' teaching, and if Jesus was the son of God why would he not discuss it if his Father was explicitly against it? I'm not talking about whether it is "sinful" or not. I'm talking about whether Jesus thought it was sinful or not. You think my reasoning is illogical, I just want to know why.

Ok.

Well looking at the passage you mention, jesus is talking about divorce. To me, what he says there is just about the issue he is refering: divorce and anything else is conjecture.

Now, if jesus said homosexuality is a sin explicitly, you'd have a point. But as such, all you're doing is infering from silence.

I do realise that. I'm not turning victims into sinners. I'm making sin into something sinful, and accepting that sometimes it poses problems even for those people who were innocent. To use an extreme example, a person engages in unprotected sex and becomes infected with HIV/AIDS. Seven years later they are in a car crash and the attending paramedic accidentally gets infected blood from the victim into their system and becomes infected themselves - the paramedic did nothing wrong, but because of someone else's sin, they now have to live with negative consequences for the rest of her life. In saying this, I'm not advocating that a person who gets out of an abusive relationship is "sinning" for doing so, just accepting that sin has turned what should have been something beautiful into something that is very very ugly.

I have no absolute answer for tough situations. If such a situation ever arose and I was in a position to help, my best advice to me would be to simply help them find a way out of abuse, their own way. If they want to split and never remarry, I'll support them. If they remarry, I'll support them. If they don't even choose to divorce but simply live apart for the rest of their life I'll support that too. I can't advocate them staying in a harmful situation because that would be ethically wrong to leave someone in a dangerous position - but ultimately it has to be their choice to leave, I can't force them.

You're right, sin can turn something beautiful into something ugly.

I agree. Ethics have to overide sin in such a situation. When someone is in a dangerous situation you have to set sin aside and offer real practical help, like what you suggest. It has to be their own choice to leave, but they should also not be guilted for doing so later either. Empathy and ethics are necessary and valuable in such circumstances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
shadowhive

Enough of the pseudo-science. Science says homosexuality is caused by four things -

Genetics - Some peoples hormones arent in the right ratios so they dont end up getting an all male or all female brain.

Culture - Parental values can mould youngsters into homosexuals.

Psychosis - Mental trauma (attempted suicide, abusive relationship, etc) can cause homosexuality.

Chemicals/Drugs - Rewires the hormones and brains of individuals.

The Bible says it isnt a sin to have homosexual thoughts but it is if you act on them. We would call a murderer evil and lock them up even if their genetics made them prone to violant outbursts, even if their parents were toxic, even if they were psychotic or if their crime arose from them being off their heads on drugs.

The murderer is still expected to practice self-restraint as God requires those with homosexual urges to practice self-restraint.

Different situations altogether. But I think you knew that already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beckys_Mom

I was influenced in starting this thread due to an ongoing debate on the subject of Homosexuality and how the church sees this form of sexuality

Yet there are a number of things stated by individuals that need to be clarified.

1st, is homosexuality really a sin as seen by the church or is it merely a fallacious interpretation of the bible?

2nd Can homosexuality be a sin if it is determined by biology and or genetics?

3rd can we consider homosexuality a sin if it is not in fact determined by biology and or genetics, but is merely a choice based on inclination due to society and or sexual imprinting?

If our sexuality is in in any way determined by biology and or genetics, then I think one cannot consider it a sin since a sin as we classify it is an action made by choice on following a specific path or action, if it is actually embedded in our very fabric, we can no more judge it than we can judge people for breathing, but if it is a sociological factor that determines sexuality, can it then be considered a sin?

Your thoughts are welcome...

I tossed a coin one day and said - Heads I'll be straight and only like guys..tails I'll swing the opposite way.. It came up heads, so it was an easy choice to make up my mind what sexuality I wished to have ..I was going to do the ole - Eeenie Meenie Minie Moe to help me chose my sexuality, but the coin toss was quicker lol :P I am just messing Jorel to add some humour..

Seriously though. and these are my own thoughts and observations......I don't think it is a choice to become a homosexual.. Not if so many took their lives because they knew it was not normal and all they did to try and be what is considered normal... Force it - Then you had those who forced themselves to date females and even marry them, thinking it would make the gay go away ..But these things cannot work.. I know if I forced myself to be with another woman and marry her, I would be miserable and couldn't stick it..It is not in me to be gay, I cannot get my head around it......Show your Hate - .I guess the same for those who are gay....Some have been known to spout hate over time towards fellow gays thinking that if they condition themselves to HATE it more, it may cure them...weird but I have read that once before..Got me wondering about Fred Phelps of the WBC lol

The bible.. In those days man didn't hold a general understanding, ( not much different from so many today) so as the saying goes - Man fears what he/she does not understand.. It's in our nature to be that way too

So, because it looks odd and not natural to them back them, they thought it was against God...Same for the people today who are greatly against it.....No change there.... So I do not think it is wrong to look down on those in the days of the bible who condemned homosexuality, because they are no different from us today...

Considering that my cousin Sarah is the only gay on my dads side of the family, we know of no other ..I cannot say it is something that runs in the family...Gays do come from straight couples.. Yet I do laugh at those that say - "If they hang around with gays or raised with them, they will turn gay".. That is just an idiotic and dumb thing to say, yet for some reason I find their stupidity amusing..

Biology / Science - I think it could be some sort glitch with the X and Y chromosomes that determine whether we will be male of female.. The glitch could be IE - the X chromosome that makes you a male but faulty in a way that when you are born a male, later on in life as everything else take place, you could find you have female attributes some stronger than others ..So strong that the males find themselves attracted to the same gender, while those who are not effected as strong with the glitch, find that they can be a little feminine but still be 100% straight... It all depends.. I could be wrong, but they are just a few of my own thoughts.

Edited by Beckys_Mom
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Right Wing

Different situations altogether. But I think you knew that already.

They all still require a choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Right Wing

I tossed a coin one day and said - Heads I'll be straight and only like guys..tails I'll swing the opposite way.. It came up heads, so it was an easy choice to make up my mind what sexuality I wished to have ..I was going to do the ole - Eeenie Meenie Minie Moe to help me chose my sexuality, but the coin toss was quicker lol :P I am just messing Jorel to add some humour..

Seriously though. and these are my own thoughts and observations......I don't think it is a choice to become a homosexual.. Not if so many took their lives because they knew it was not normal and all they did to try and be what is considered normal... Force it - Then you had those who forced themselves to date females and even marry them, thinking it would make the gay go away ..But these things cannot work.. I know if I forced myself to be with another woman and marry her, I would be miserable and couldn't stick it..It is not in me to be gay, I cannot get my head around it......Show your Hate - .I guess the same for those who are gay....Some have been known to spout hate over time towards fellow gays thinking that if they condition themselves to HATE it more, it may cure them...weird but I have read that once before..Got me wondering about Fred Phelps of the WBC lol

The bible.. In those days man didn't hold a general understanding, ( not much different from so many today) so as the saying goes - Man fears what he/she does not understand.. It's in our nature to be that way too

So, because it looks odd and not natural to them back them, they thought it was against God...Same for the people today who are greatly against it.....No change there.... So I do not think it is wrong to look down on those in the days of the bible who condemned homosexuality, because they are no different from us today...

Considering that my cousin Sarah is the only gay on my dads side of the family, we know of no other ..I cannot say it is something that runs in the family...Gays do come from straight couples.. Yet I do laugh at those that say - "If they hang around with gays or raised with them, they will turn gay".. That is just an idiotic and dumb thing to say, yet for some reason I find their stupidity amusing..

Biology / Science - I think it could be some sort glitch with the X and Y chromosomes that determine whether we will be male of female.. The glitch could be IE - the X chromosome that makes you a male but faulty in a way that when you are born a male, later on in life as everything else take place, you could find you have female attributes some stronger than others ..So strong that the males find themselves attracted to the same gender, while those who are not effected as strong with the glitch, find that they can be a little feminine but still be 100% straight... It all depends.. I could be wrong, but they are just a few of my own thoughts.

The Americans created a gay bomb you know.

Apparently spraying female pheromones onto a man will make hetrosexual men fancy him and vice versa. Maybe your cousins girfriend wore her brothers jumper?

If it was genetic then you have relatives hiding their sexuality???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranoid Android

Now, if jesus said homosexuality is a sin explicitly, you'd have a point. But as such, all you're doing is infering from silence.

But he didn't, so we have to infer his views from other things Jesus said. And in my opinion, if he didn't mention it here as being accepted, then at no time did he change marriage as being the only God-sanctioned sexual relationship.

You're right, sin can turn something beautiful into something ugly.

I agree. Ethics have to overide sin in such a situation. When someone is in a dangerous situation you have to set sin aside and offer real practical help, like what you suggest. It has to be their own choice to leave, but they should also not be guilted for doing so later either. Empathy and ethics are necessary and valuable in such circumstances.

At least we agree on something. I'd been thinking it would never happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
shadowhive

They all still require a choice.

Yes but if I murder someone I'm chosing to murder. The person being murdered has no choice.

I the same true in relationships? Not healthy ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
shadowhive

But he didn't, so we have to infer his views from other things Jesus said. And in my opinion, if he didn't mention it here as being accepted, then at no time did he change marriage as being the only God-sanctioned sexual relationship.

It's unfortunate isn't it, that that's all we have to go on. Basically all you're doing is making a guess on what he thought, in absence of absolute confirmation.

At least we agree on something. I'd been thinking it would never happen.

Heh. We agree on some things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
White Crane Feather

If Homosexuality is not a choice , why are woman turning to it in droves after there marriages break up, unable to find a man who can understand them they then find this path.

and what of free will Free Will? yes FREE WILL....to say your not given this blessing and claim you dont have this is the counter from those who practice Homosexuality as a lifestyle.

for all the proof that the homosexuals claim that they are born that way there is no verifiable and repeatable proof, in that we can not know a lifeforms chosen path before its walked, DNA can not show this... .likewise theres no proof in DNA murderes are born that way, there is no proof in DNA rightous are likewise born that way. people take free will out of the debate.

To denie you have been given free will is a major cause for concern.

Does not the mind control the flesh? but the Homosexuals claim the flesh controls the mind, the true principal (as shown by Saint Paul: the law in my members is at war ...wretched man i am) is that we all have to rise above our physical desires,

I'm pretty sure it's not a choice. I could not be attracted to man even if I really really tried.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pop It and Shove It

I wouldn't be surprised if some of the people who think it's a choice and talk about having to "overcome" these "urges" are a little homosexual themselves and in serious denial.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beckys_Mom

The Americans created a gay bomb you know.

Apparently spraying female pheromones onto a man will make hetrosexual men fancy him and vice versa. Maybe your cousins girfriend wore her brothers jumper?

If it was genetic then you have relatives hiding their sexuality???

Are you messing about? This IS a joke...right?.. Sorry, I just cannot take any of the above seriously...Try posting it in the jokes section, you might get lucky and send a few laughing !!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Right Wing

Are you messing about? This IS a joke...right?.. Sorry, I just cannot take any of the above seriously...Try posting it in the jokes section, you might get lucky and send a few laughing !!

A little touchy arent we?

What are you surpressing? lmao

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranoid Android

It's unfortunate isn't it, that that's all we have to go on. Basically all you're doing is making a guess on what he thought, in absence of absolute confirmation.

Isn't that exactly what everyone else does when talking about this topic. On the balance of evidence you certainly could not say that Jesus was pro-homosexual, could you.

Heh. We agree on some things.

I thought us two agreeing was one of the signs of the impending apocalypse :rofl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beckys_Mom

What are you surpressing? lmao

Not my intelligence..I sometimes wish I could though and post up random dumb ideas and think it's funny like you have lol

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
shadowhive

Are you messing about? This IS a joke...right?.. Sorry, I just cannot take any of the above seriously...Try posting it in the jokes section, you might get lucky and send a few laughing !!

I know it does sound like a joke, but they really did propose such a thing. They thought if they dropped it over an enemy they'd be so overcome with lust they'd not be able too fight.

I don't think it ever got past a proposal though, but it is pretty crazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Orcseeker

The Americans created a gay bomb you know.

Apparently spraying female pheromones onto a man will make hetrosexual men fancy him and vice versa. Maybe your cousins girfriend wore her brothers jumper?

If it was genetic then you have relatives hiding their sexuality???

Implying that homosexuality is hereditary passed on through a "gay" gene. Which is more than likely false.

No one comes out completely straight, gay or bisexual. Let's use these as the three main groups. Every straight person is a little gay. Moving further down that scale you become bi-sexual. Then moving further, you are gay but you also have a little straight in you as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
shadowhive

Isn't that exactly what everyone else does when talking about this topic. On the balance of evidence you certainly could not say that Jesus was pro-homosexual, could you.

On balance of evidence, since he said nothing about homosexuality you can't really say anything either way. (And since I'm not christian what he did and did not say is relevent enough to me personally for me to say anything.)

What he did say, was referring tto hetrosexuality so you can only take it to mean he was pro-straight marriage.

To use a imple example, if I say 'I like mushroom pizza' what does that statement say about me? Well it says one thing: that I like mushroom pizza. It doesn't say what my opinion is on other kinds of pizza, or if I like burgers or not and you can't take my silence on the matter to insert that I do/don't like in there. (Thankfully unlike jesus you can simply ask and I'd tell you, so you'd not have to do that :P)

I thought us two agreeing was one of the signs of the impending apocalypse :rofl:

Well it has been suddenly warm here today.... :P

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beckys_Mom

I know it does sound like a joke, but they really did propose such a thing. They thought if they dropped it over an enemy they'd be so overcome with lust they'd not be able too fight.

I don't think it ever got past a proposal though, but it is pretty crazy.

There is no vaccine for stupidity, if there was, we could inject it into a bomb and spray the idiots that came up with the proposal .

Now, if you could excuse me while I take a break, I need to rest my face in the palms of my hands !!!

Edited by Beckys_Mom
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Right Wing

Implying that homosexuality is hereditary passed on through a "gay" gene. Which is more than likely false.

No one comes out completely straight, gay or bisexual. Let's use these as the three main groups. Every straight person is a little gay. Moving further down that scale you become bi-sexual. Then moving further, you are gay but you also have a little straight in you as well.

I'm all man thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
shadowhive

There is no vaccine for stupidity, if there was, we could inject it into a bomb and spray the idiots that came up with the proposal .

Now, if you could excuse me while I take a break, I need to rest my face in the palms of my hands !!!

I know right?

I know when I first heard of it I thought 'is this a joke?' and then I read on and my thoughts turned to 'people are idiots'. It's amazing what stupidity can lead people to do.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pop It and Shove It

I'm all man thanks.

He who doth protest too much...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.