03-27-10, 11:47 PM #61
Studies are dependent upon the 'question asked'- That question only gives you certain answers and without 'other questions' what you are left with is perspective.
This is not an exclusive conversation between two members. You are introducing yet another red herring for people to read in your posts.
There are many members taking part in an open Internet Forum Discussion.
Peace be unto you
03-27-10, 11:54 PM #62
03-28-10, 12:07 AM #63
Many studies factor that in, have a control group and statistically calculate probability of error.
Rather, they are statistical.
I think the thread is going on a tangent because of my comments- I'm out of this discussion, I made a mistake posting here-
Peace be unto you
03-30-10, 05:28 AM #64
I have posted this before but I believe it is important, and may even save some souls from the sin of homosexuality, so I will post again:
Sex is for procreation: that's it's use! Just as there is normal or ab-normal there is use or ab-USE. Any act of sex that is not directed towards procreation is an act of ab-use. BUT another use of sex is LOVE...(phew!)
03-30-10, 05:46 AM #65
03-30-10, 07:50 PM #66
03-30-10, 08:03 PM #67
04-01-10, 03:18 AM #68so no sex after menopause
no sex for anyone who is sterile
no oral sex
Did I get that right?
04-01-10, 03:48 AM #69
Are you going to present some sort of bizarre unified duality wherein each is ideally (according to God's design) included, but where heterosexuals are excused from utilizing both purposes, whilst homosexuals are not? That is, heterosexuals can forgo the procreation side of sex because of the "love" factor and because they, in their uncorrupted state, are able to conceive children, but homosexuals can't use love as an excuse for sex because they are physically unable to procreate by default, and therefore sterile couples or even those who practice birth control are excused, but homosexuals are not?
That seems to be an attitude I have come across before. A rather peculiar and contradictory philosophy.
Your two "excuses" for sex are contradictory, as you have explained them.
It's either one or both, but not one and/or the other. That doesn't make sense.
Please, explain yourself.
04-03-10, 12:03 AM #70
So, Spectrum. You have nothing to add to your explanation? You can't flesh it out? (no pun intended, regardless of subject matter)
04-06-10, 10:18 AM #71
Pleasure can be disregarded because the only way you can know that is if you have tried it, and you do not have to experience it to study it. Put simply, before you try the practical, you do the theory. It is as true for driving as it is for life.
04-09-10, 10:09 AM #72
04-09-10, 10:45 AM #73
Oh, and to actually address the heart of this topic:
I answered "Other" because frankly, people mistranslate, misinterpret, and generally do what they want with the Bible.
There are passages that say something different depending on translation. The KJV for example has the word "sodomite" in several places which has traditionally been translated as homosexual. Unfortunately for the KJV-Only crowd, the original word in Hebrew had nothing to with homosexuality as we know it, nor did it even have anything to do with Sodom or people who live there!!!
Then there is the interpretation. Does it mean this straightforward, is it speaking about this specifically? Or something like "Back then, did they really have an understanding of psychology and gender, or was everything black and white? And should we interpret this differently based on our understanding of modern times?"
And of course, there are those who say "God knows the human mind better than humans, who are you to challenge God's Word with pop psychology?"
Really, there are differing degrees to how Christians interpret what the Bible says about homosexuality, some taking polar opposites, and others being more moderate.
It is hard to say definitively YES because some Christians are very tolerant, if not openly homosexual, and others are staunchly opposed. And some don't think it's a big deal or don't care. To some, the Bible places a moral emphasis on other more important things, rather than which gender you're attracted to.
And that's why it's such a complicated issue. Because it isn't just about careless sex between to guys (or girls) in many cases, but involves deep attractions that are only different from heterosexuality because of the gender. Some say it isn't right to deprive people of a loving relationship because they aren't attracted to the opposite sex, and others think that no such thing as love can possibly exist between two men or women.
"There is no gay love, only gay lust!" I have heard it said.
04-27-10, 11:39 AM #74
04-27-10, 12:37 PM #75
04-27-10, 12:42 PM #76
04-27-10, 12:57 PM #77
04-27-10, 02:33 PM #78
Why does it matter what the bible says? We're talking about a book where a guy raised the dead & turned water into wine, the earth was created in only six days (and is only a few millennia old), a giant pillar of fire & cloud floated above a bunch of desert wandering ex-slaves to protect them, a man's wife was turned to salt for looking at a burning city, and a man was swallowed by a giant sea bass and spit out a few days later. Seriously? What next, we'll start talking about Hindu deities as if they were respectable reference points for morality and start referring to Zeus and Hera for ethical standard.
04-27-10, 02:38 PM #79
04-27-10, 03:28 PM #80
Long story short, the Bible does say to stay out of people's business and don't judge so long as the sin isn't brought forward. Controversial things are to be done in private so as not to sin by causing another to see what he/she believes is a sin and lose faith.