Started in a new thread, is homosexuality a part of homosexuals (like something they are born with, a trait if you please), or is learnt behaviour?
Yours truly takes the negative.
Yours truly takes the negative.
Homosexuality: Is it the way a person is born?
- Thread starter Groundzero
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
They were either created for glory or for destruction.
7 Everyone who is called by My name, Whom I have created for My glory; I have formed him, yes, I have made him."
Once they have awakened to the call of God. They will follow Christ"s decisions and desires.
7 Everyone who is called by My name, Whom I have created for My glory; I have formed him, yes, I have made him."
Once they have awakened to the call of God. They will follow Christ"s decisions and desires.
My nephew said he knew he was attracted to boys instead of girls "at roughly seven or eight years old."
He will tell you he had a normal childhood. His father and mother loved him very much and never hit him or verbally abused him.
He states he was never sexually abused or even picked on when he was in school.
Lots of friends, but more friends who were girls than guys.
He came out in the fall of his freshman year and insists that there was nothing in his life that would cause anyone to think it was result of his environment.
Read into that what you will.
He will tell you he had a normal childhood. His father and mother loved him very much and never hit him or verbally abused him.
He states he was never sexually abused or even picked on when he was in school.
Lots of friends, but more friends who were girls than guys.
He came out in the fall of his freshman year and insists that there was nothing in his life that would cause anyone to think it was result of his environment.
Read into that what you will.
See...homosexuals use that excuse to show that their feelings are 'natural'. But honestly, it just doesn't hold water. Yeah, they probably were born that way, we're all born sinful with a broken nature. But that does not give us any excuse for it....sin is sin, we need Jesus, and we need to repent.
I can't really accuse a boy who has never acted on his Homosexual tendencies as sinful. Though the nature as we all have it is sin. Other than that I agree that it is by birth this occurs usually and like Rach stated there's no excuse for each of our tendencies even if we are not by nature at fault for them. At some point we have to realize Christ died to remove the stain of guilt from our conscience and give us something else to wear. He gives us our new clothes before we are even washed so to speak. Now with most inner healing I believe Christ may or may not give a sinful part of our nature to bear through our walk with Him. One clear sign that He will heal it is whether or not it interferes with our earthly ministry in Christ. And that's kind of an individual topic. I'm not against understanding that a homosexual by nature before Christ, would carry that part of his nature with Him after becoming a Christian, to the day he/she dies. I don't want to make a relation of homosexuality to physical infirmities, but concerning the point of ministry, someone born crippled before Christ and not being healed physically before, during or after the point of salvation: Their ministry must not require the healing or God simply does not will it. The last is that the person in question hadn't the faith for the healing, but I can't judge that from the outside, though it's true this happens. So you can kind of go through a few steps here if you're wondering, "God, do you want to heal me of this?" It's a valid question, but you might get a yes, no or wait (A no in this context means wait since we will all be healed eventually either way after death). Jesus always has purpose in his healing ministry.
Do you guys/girls agree with my evaluation of the condition? I have tried maintaining the scriptural integrity of my ideas throughout the post.
Do you guys/girls agree with my evaluation of the condition? I have tried maintaining the scriptural integrity of my ideas throughout the post.
aspen
“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
Both. Sexuality is deeply-rooted and complex.
The question about nature vs. nurture should really be rephrased as 'is homosexuality a person's fault or do they have no choice?'
The question about nature vs. nurture should really be rephrased as 'is homosexuality a person's fault or do they have no choice?'
I believe that homosexuality is a perversion of a natural sexual drive. Therefore, you can't be born with it. I'll post some more stuff soon, but i've got some friends coming round. Bring the party on! 
Hi aspen,
I don't think that's the right question either. Many a person is not at 'fault' and has no 'choice' about what happens to them as children - who their parents were or what their parents believed or exposed them to - but once they begin to develop sexual urges after puberty, they have a great deal of choice about how they deal with them.
Groundzero in the preceding post expresses one aspect of how to understand homosexual behaviour, but there is more to it than only 'perversion of a normal sex drive' (although that's a good start of a definition), because of the spiritual aspect may be stronger than the person's will, until they have the Holy Spirit's help after being born again from above through faith in Jesus Christ.
No Christian who 'was homosexual' before new birth, should expect, or intend, to remain 'homosexual' after new birth. Jesus Christ broke the power of sin, and Christians are called out of idolatry into the other worship system, to worship the Father in spirit and truth. There is no communion between light and darkness, and the unclean spirits which drive homosexual desire, are not of God.
Hi mls,
I don't think you have succeeded in 'maintaining' 'scriptural integrity', because you have not mentioned, let alone agreed with, God's declarations about homosexual behaviour through the writers of His word.
Additionally, the following -
seems to indicate you don't believe Christ died to free us from sin that we may serve (worship) Him without fear (or distraction).
The accommodation of sin which you are willing to attribute to God, is deeply disturbing.
Perhaps you would like to rephrase that?
I don't see how I could rephrase it. A person isn't given a heal-all card upon the point of salvation, but the Holy Spirit's power to overcome any temptation. If someone's ministry which takes place after salvation cannot occur with the nature someone was born with, however, I believe God would transform that part of it (as well as anything else he wants to in His timing and method). That doesn't mean we lose our sinful nature upon receiving Christ, but we put on a new nature, even while we are still sinful. That's about as scriptural as I can get without quoting verse. Otherwise, there's no reason a Christian would ever sin after the point of salvation. We still fall short, we still struggle against our own nature, we still need to overcome daily according to whatever burden we're meant to bear, which is light as a feather concerning the exceeding honor and glory we receive for bearing Christ's name. I'm sorry if we still disagree.
-- As far as "Both" I would have to agree with Aspen.
As I mentioned, my nephew felt he was gay at "roughly seven or eight years old" (his words).
He had never been bullied, sexually assaulted, neglected or ignored, and had grown up in a loving, supportive nuclear family.
I do however also know people who "discovered" they were gay in their 20s or later after years of sexual promiscuity gone awry, sexual molestations throughout childhood, outright sexual assaults, lifelong bullying for being "different," or even simply becuase to confusion due to experimentation.
More than one has said that since members of the gay community were so non-judgmental and accepting, and in many cases made them feel as if they "belonged" for the first time in their lives, that helped convince them they must be gay.
You are more fundagelical than me, and you toe that line sometimes, but I can't be angry at you because you at least think about it before you jump on a bandwagon.
I've known, personally people from their diaper days (nearly) who were gay and you could tell it. One in particular, the man was a marine, and a deacon. The wife was a school teacher, and sunday school teacher. They weren't playing the parts they lived them. They had about the healthiest house I have ever seen.
Their son showed gay characteristics at a very early age. They raised him appropriately, sports etc... he excelled at sports as both parents were athletic. They got counseling at first because they thought they were doing something wrong. Then to make sure it wasn't some trauma that had their son leaning that way....
The kid dated girls in high school. He didn't know any better. For Prom his mom wanted a picture of him and his gf kissing. He got nauseaus. His gf knew better and told his mom that she thought their son was gay. They had a very good and respectful relationship as high school kids, enjoyed each other blah blah blah, but he had never tried to grope or kiss her.
So back to counseling.
Later in his life, in college he found a man he was attracted to, and they dated and are probably still together.
The kid didn't do the stereotypical promiscuous thing. He was most likely virgin until he met that guy in college.
I'd say he was born gay. I have NO ISSUE defending that. Most Xians won't ever understand it because they refuse to acknowledge homosexuals are people, dehumanize them, and never get to know any. It's very reflective of the days of slavery and after, or woman's voting rights, etc.....
NOW the flip side is, I know people who have ended up being gay because of events, traumatic and other, in their lives. Here's the deal. It really doesn't matter HOW they got there. If they are there and are actually gay, it's how the roll of the dice ended up. The Church needs to get off their butts.
You do have some people who are just sexual, bi sexual, sexual addicts, etc... that have gay sex, hetero sex, toy sex, fruit and veggie sex, whatever.... Usually those are people who were sexually traumatized as well. BUT NOT ALWAYS.
Until the Church goes after all sins, as it does homosexual sins, it's being a bigot by definition. Until every type of sinner, is put through the same bs as the glbt community, you prove the Church is a bigoted organization.
Historically it's proven this to be true. Interracial marriage. Black rights. Women's voting rights. At the times those topics were issues the CHURCH was making the same heated arguments. Just as we look back at that today and frown in disgust, so to will this topic be looked back upon.
don't be sorry. If no one disagreed this forum would be really boring fast.
I understand where you come from now. I don't agree. It doesn't matter. If there was something you were missing that mattered to salvation I'd carry on...(assuming my view was right, of course.) But I don't think it matters here. Our disagreement is on speculative parts anyway, but the Spirit of both sides of this are pointing in the same direction, so what the heck. We can call each other childish names, stick our tongues out and go neener neener and have some fun with it.
So is doggy style, oral, anal, woman on top, or even missionary if you aren't trying to have a child from the sex and are doing it for pleasure. If the man doesn't have a beard, and his hair is too long, wait too short, the woman isn't in a veil, doesn't have her hair covered, if they like it, if they think of being on an open beach in the rain rather than the reality of their bedroom, all lights out, blinds pulled closed, door locked, children out of the house and neighbors gone.... Don't wanna tempt your brother afterall.....
It's all perverted to someone.
In Christ's day you could see homosexual sex in the public baths, in the alleys, in the Lord's houses, it was NOT an uncommon thing. And yet, He never addressed it.
Why? When you obsess over it and make it bigger than what it is, you miss the point.
White woman marrying black or arabic man, another perversion.
Man marrying woman his own age, or one that is too young, both are perversions to some cultures.
Do you get the point? you can't make that call.
I've known, personally people from their diaper days (nearly) who were gay and you could tell it. One in particular, the man was a marine, and a deacon. The wife was a school teacher, and sunday school teacher. They weren't playing the parts they lived them. They had about the healthiest house I have ever seen.
Their son showed gay characteristics at a very early age. They raised him appropriately, sports etc... he excelled at sports as both parents were athletic. They got counseling at first because they thought they were doing something wrong. Then to make sure it wasn't some trauma that had their son leaning that way....
The kid dated girls in high school. He didn't know any better. For Prom his mom wanted a picture of him and his gf kissing. He got nauseaus. His gf knew better and told his mom that she thought their son was gay. They had a very good and respectful relationship as high school kids, enjoyed each other blah blah blah, but he had never tried to grope or kiss her.
So back to counseling.
Later in his life, in college he found a man he was attracted to, and they dated and are probably still together.
The kid didn't do the stereotypical promiscuous thing. He was most likely virgin until he met that guy in college.
I'd say he was born gay. I have NO ISSUE defending that. Most Xians won't ever understand it because they refuse to acknowledge homosexuals are people, dehumanize them, and never get to know any. It's very reflective of the days of slavery and after, or woman's voting rights, etc.....
NOW the flip side is, I know people who have ended up being gay because of events, traumatic and other, in their lives. Here's the deal. It really doesn't matter HOW they got there. If they are there and are actually gay, it's how the roll of the dice ended up. The Church needs to get off their butts.
You do have some people who are just sexual, bi sexual, sexual addicts, etc... that have gay sex, hetero sex, toy sex, fruit and veggie sex, whatever.... Usually those are people who were sexually traumatized as well. BUT NOT ALWAYS.
Until the Church goes after all sins, as it does homosexual sins, it's being a bigot by definition. Until every type of sinner, is put through the same bs as the glbt community, you prove the Church is a bigoted organization.
Historically it's proven this to be true. Interracial marriage. Black rights. Women's voting rights. At the times those topics were issues the CHURCH was making the same heated arguments. Just as we look back at that today and frown in disgust, so to will this topic be looked back upon.
don't be sorry. If no one disagreed this forum would be really boring fast.
I understand where you come from now. I don't agree. It doesn't matter. If there was something you were missing that mattered to salvation I'd carry on...(assuming my view was right, of course.) But I don't think it matters here. Our disagreement is on speculative parts anyway, but the Spirit of both sides of this are pointing in the same direction, so what the heck. We can call each other childish names, stick our tongues out and go neener neener and have some fun with it.
I believe that homosexuality is a perversion of a natural sexual drive. Therefore, you can't be born with it. I'll post some more stuff soon, but i've got some friends coming round. Bring the party on!
So is doggy style, oral, anal, woman on top, or even missionary if you aren't trying to have a child from the sex and are doing it for pleasure. If the man doesn't have a beard, and his hair is too long, wait too short, the woman isn't in a veil, doesn't have her hair covered, if they like it, if they think of being on an open beach in the rain rather than the reality of their bedroom, all lights out, blinds pulled closed, door locked, children out of the house and neighbors gone.... Don't wanna tempt your brother afterall.....
It's all perverted to someone.
In Christ's day you could see homosexual sex in the public baths, in the alleys, in the Lord's houses, it was NOT an uncommon thing. And yet, He never addressed it.
Why? When you obsess over it and make it bigger than what it is, you miss the point.
White woman marrying black or arabic man, another perversion.
Man marrying woman his own age, or one that is too young, both are perversions to some cultures.
Do you get the point? you can't make that call.
Pug, I am pretty sure you know what you are trying to say specifically.
Would it be possible for you to give a Reader's Digest Condensed Version for the rest of us?
Pug, I am pretty sure you know what you are trying to say specifically.
Would it be possible for you to give a Reader's Digest Condensed Version for the rest of us?
Would it be possible for you to give a Reader's Digest Condensed Version for the rest of us?
Pug, I am pretty sure you know what you are trying to say specifically.
Would it be possible for you to give a Reader's Digest Condensed Version for the rest of us?
some are born.
some are made.
Some just decide to play both sides.
some can't help but play both sides.
For them to be condemned and dehumanized shows gross ignorance from the ones assaulting them socially. It shows a desire to dehumanize and hold hateful bias against. Unfortunately it's one of the characteristics that design the church today, same as interracial marraiges did 50 years ago.
some are made.
Some just decide to play both sides.
some can't help but play both sides.
For them to be condemned and dehumanized shows gross ignorance from the ones assaulting them socially. It shows a desire to dehumanize and hold hateful bias against. Unfortunately it's one of the characteristics that design the church today, same as interracial marraiges did 50 years ago.
I wish you'd stick to dilemmas that someone is promoting and stop burning strawmen.
No one said anything about not sharing the gospel, nor that sharing it would be dehumanizing.
Being dehumanizing is dehumanizing.
If you have to tell someone they are homosexual, which they will know, to share the gospel, if you have to spend time in judgement to find sins to threaten them with to share the Gospel, you convert GOd from LOVE to a 9-11 type fascist terrorist.
Their sins are not relevant to discuss and name if you are actually preaching the Gospel and not oppressive bs.
AND, if you will mention a homosexuals sins in a discussion with them, but you don't bring up adultery, sex addiction, cheating taxes, etc... to others you discuss the gospel with, by definition you are a bigot.
I'm not calling YOU a bigot. A person doing that, is the bigot.
AND it's not my judgement, it's the meaning of the word.
No one said anything about not sharing the gospel, nor that sharing it would be dehumanizing.
Being dehumanizing is dehumanizing.
If you have to tell someone they are homosexual, which they will know, to share the gospel, if you have to spend time in judgement to find sins to threaten them with to share the Gospel, you convert GOd from LOVE to a 9-11 type fascist terrorist.
Their sins are not relevant to discuss and name if you are actually preaching the Gospel and not oppressive bs.
AND, if you will mention a homosexuals sins in a discussion with them, but you don't bring up adultery, sex addiction, cheating taxes, etc... to others you discuss the gospel with, by definition you are a bigot.
I'm not calling YOU a bigot. A person doing that, is the bigot.
AND it's not my judgement, it's the meaning of the word.
I don't think you should, by definition of the gospel, have to bring up someone's specific sins during evangelizing. I don't usually think about doing that during evangelism, because the good news is the good news just as much as it is to a Christian as it should be to a non believer. I hear the law is a good place to start, if you're talking about catching some fish, the word will reveal whatever is inside someone that is separating them from God. So the law is a good place to start, but it's more personal than just a method. You're catching fish, but each fish has a name, history, and series of addictions that may be keeping them captive. You can go nuts on the fishing metaphor. It's great because of how specific it is. You do go into this with a plan and as much preparation as you can. And afterwards, you can eat the person?! (I think I took the metaphor too far).
Um, M
Um, M
Martin,
We finally found something to disagree on. Sounds like you'd approve of Ray Comfort? I'd tie him up and lock him in a cell. But I'd feed him well.
The good news has very little to do with sin. That's how I see it. I can't think of ANY reason I need even say the word SIN if I'm discussing the Gospel.
I think when people go into the sin Chat they make God appear to be an insane fascist or terrorist.
We finally found something to disagree on. Sounds like you'd approve of Ray Comfort? I'd tie him up and lock him in a cell. But I'd feed him well.
The good news has very little to do with sin. That's how I see it. I can't think of ANY reason I need even say the word SIN if I'm discussing the Gospel.
I think when people go into the sin Chat they make God appear to be an insane fascist or terrorist.
No, sorry again Xian, I think you're agreeing with me, at least on my first point.
As to my post.
"I don't think you should-have to bring up someone's specific sins during evangelizing."
I guess I do tote discussing general sin though (At least in some form) because without the law, we don't know our sin. So without knowledge of why we need God, there's no point (in our shaded perspective) to be saved. You don't "Have" to bring up the word sin per say, but there should be some context in evangelism for what people are being saved from.
But ya, the good news doesn't really change either way.
-I could just be editing all my posts after you first read them just to confuse you. But nah, I wouldn't do that.
Dum Dum dummm... would I?
As to my post.
"I don't think you should-have to bring up someone's specific sins during evangelizing."
I guess I do tote discussing general sin though (At least in some form) because without the law, we don't know our sin. So without knowledge of why we need God, there's no point (in our shaded perspective) to be saved. You don't "Have" to bring up the word sin per say, but there should be some context in evangelism for what people are being saved from.
But ya, the good news doesn't really change either way.
-I could just be editing all my posts after you first read them just to confuse you. But nah, I wouldn't do that.
Dum Dum dummm... would I?
heheheheh you are a dork.
Ok, why don't you think the Spirit of GOD will make folks know about their sins? Seems that's part of the role it plays in scripture.
I don't find that I need to tell anyone what a sin is, or convince them that they do it.
I talk about FOR GOD SO LOVED THE WORLD,
Then I talk about what love is. AGAPAO, emotion with action. It can actually be ANY emotion with an action, just discussing the word that is, but in our case it's concern/love/care/give a _ _ _ _, etc...
I find NOBODY hates to care for others. Well that's a lie some really traumatized folks do, but I can work with them too.
Then I discuss how through the acts of service, God changes us. So if they start the life, try to learn how to love as God does, HE will do the rest. They just need to stay on that track.
I can't imagine how you could expect to go to heaven/resurrection, IF you failed to meet 1 john 4:16.
I guess it's hard for someone to imagine a better life in Christ Jesus according to His love if they're in an environment when they're in danger of dying the day they give their lives to Christ. There has to be a better reason (more reasonable reason) than "God is loving" and "I'm going to be living a better life after", when that person might die the day of their salvation. If someone is going to die because of a change like this, God doesn't appear loving and there isn't a valid hope of a long life in Christ (This side of eternity). Each of those quoted positions are true, but don't convince someone their need to be saved when it matters (or when their life is in jeopardy.)
Similar threads
