Christianity and Homosexuality

[Lemiden]

Again, you are choosing which denomination to listen to. Both of you are not wrong, because you have faith in it. But I must point out that your view is also biased to the LDS side of things (I investigated this church when I was looking for my faith. Good people, I just did not believe in a new series of prophets.)

I think everybody does that, to some extent, even the Atheists. It's like with GoG, his arguments are mostly based around a monolithic view of Christianity as one single set of beliefs with exceptions kinda tossed around but not really relevant.

I totally agree. I am now Church of Christ myself (not LDS to prevent confusion). We act merely on what the bible says, and do not presume (so for instance we do not use instrumental music in our services, not because it was declared wrong, but because it was never declared right. We sing because we are told to during worship, but we try to play it safe otherwise). But you are totally right.

[Ascon]

I totally agree. I am now Church of Christ myself (not LDS to prevent confusion). We act merely on what the bible says, and do not presume (so for instance we do not use instrumental music in our services, not because it was declared wrong, but because it was never declared right. We sing because we are told to during worship, but we try to play it safe otherwise). But you are totally right.

Gotcha. When you say Church of Christ as opposed to the LDS, are you referring to the Church that used to be known as the RLDS, or am I completely off track?

[Lemiden]

Also no one is to add or to subtract from the word of god with the exception of Peter and his disiples b/c christ clearly gave him the authority do so.

Really? So someone with the authority from Christ can add or subtract from the bible? I accept that.

Not sure I do. Add sure, if it is in line with the teachings of Christ, and the prophets before him, with Christ being first and foremost. But subtract? I highly doubt this.

[Nova Magna Germania]

Yes. And it appeared that your graph substantiated the claim. That is where I was confused. Did the graph refute or substantiate?

You think 14% for men who have sex with men vs 5-15% for the general male population substantiates your claim?

You are saying that 14% of homosexual men were abused and 15% of hetero men were abused, so the abuse has no affect on homosexuality? Fine. That is what I was questioning. However, the sample size seems a bit small.

No, 14% of men who have sex with men (87.7% considered themselves gay or homosexual, rest may consider themselves to be bi or even str8) vs the general male population (str8, bi, gay). First is the result from the study I quoted, 2nd is a Wiki quote (which includes multiple studies).

And it wasnt a census so results can be wrong.

You are simply regurgitating the statistics. What are you conclusions FROM those statistics?

I didnt regurgitate, I corrected you. The conclusion is that your claim about sexual abuse of children being a possible important aspect influencing sexual orientation is NOT necessarily supported. Even if studies show gays and lesbians being more likely to be victims of sexual abuse when they were kids, those may be explained by confounding factors (such as gay and lesbian kids being more likely to be homeless).

[Lemiden]

I totally agree. I am now Church of Christ myself (not LDS to prevent confusion). We act merely on what the bible says, and do not presume (so for instance we do not use instrumental music in our services, not because it was declared wrong, but because it was never declared right. We sing because we are told to during worship, but we try to play it safe otherwise). But you are totally right.

Gotcha. When you say Church of Christ as opposed to the LDS, are you referring to the Church that used to be known as the RLDS, or am I completely off track?

Off track. My current church is not LDS or RLDS. Sorta non-denominational. We have a common view, but every church location is independent and self sufficient. No overriding control from a higher church.

[Ascon]

Off track. My current church is not LDS or RLDS. Sorta non-denominational. We have a common view, but every church location is independent and self sufficient. No overriding control from a higher church.

Oh ok I'm thinking of the Community of Christ. My bad.

[Nova Magna Germania]

homosexuality =/= non-reproducing members in a group

Maybe we need another Venn diagram

Not this shit again

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=26864&p=1065644#p1065644

[Camarone]

Peter clearly passed those keys to the bishops of philidelphia and Europrahtis who he him self appointed there fore handing over the keys.

[KiloMikeAlpha]

Also no one is to add or to subtract from the word of god with the exception of Peter and his disiples b/c christ clearly gave him the authority do so.

Really? So someone with the authority from Christ can add or subtract from the bible? I accept that.

Not sure I do. Add sure, if it is in line with the teachings of Christ, and the prophets before him, with Christ being first and foremost. But subtract? I highly doubt this.

Well he is referring to is :
Deut. 4: 2
2 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.

Rev. 22: 18
18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

Most people use these two passages to rebuke the Book of Mormon. "This Book" in Revelations means Revelations. The Bible consists of many different books, all put together. They arent even in cronological order. Deut is referring to the laws:

1 Now therefore hearken, O Israel, unto the statutes and unto the judgments, which I teach you, for to do them, that ye may live, and go in and possess the land which the Lord God of your fathers giveth you.

[Lemiden]

Peter clearly passed those keys to the bishops of philidelphia and Europrahtis who he him self appointed there fore handing over the keys.

Im gonna call it. Give me a quote to prove it. FROM the NT

[New Kereptica]

Jesus gave the keys of heaven to peter and all that is fixed on earth will be fixed in heaven. Also every other church other then the catholic church was founded by men and not by christ.

Jesus was a man.

[Camarone]

And what you fix on earth will be fixed in heaven. What is not clear about this? O.k. so subtract is strechting it.

[Nova Magna Germania]

Or perhaps God, in his infinite wisdom, thought it was better to have a few non-reproducing individuals in every population. You know, so they could help their bethern raising their children and such.

Do giraffes do that?

Homosexual giraffes- yes. But it could be a coincidence
And of course, having non-reproducing members in a group is not limited to homosexuality. The concept of Alpha males anyone ? Or most of the insect world...

Still, this could be part of gods masterplan

homosexuality =/= non-reproducing members in a group

I have always wondered if the high proportion of HIV/AIDs in AMERICA in gay men(dont start in with statistics from Africa) might be due to it not being right. No proof, just a consideration.

Do you think Americans having less life expectancy than Canadians is because being American is not right?

[Camarone]

Jesus was not a simply a man. He was god in the flesh.

[KiloMikeAlpha]

Yes. And it appeared that your graph substantiated the claim. That is where I was confused. Did the graph refute or substantiate?

You think 14% for men who have sex with men vs 5-15% for the general male population substantiates your claim?

You are saying that 14% of homosexual men were abused and 15% of hetero men were abused, so the abuse has no affect on homosexuality? Fine. That is what I was questioning. However, the sample size seems a bit small.

No, 14% of men who have sex with men (87.7% considered themselves gay or homosexual, rest may consider themselves to be bi or even str8) vs the general male population (str8, bi, gay). First is the result from the study I quoted, 2nd is a Wiki quote (which includes multiple studies).

And it wasnt a census so results can be wrong.

You are simply regurgitating the statistics. What are you conclusions FROM those statistics?

I didnt regurgitate, I corrected you. The conclusion is that your claim about sexual abuse of children being a possible important aspect influencing sexual orientation is NOT necessarily supported. Even if studies show gays and lesbians being more likely to be victims of sexual abuse when they were kids, those may be explained by confounding factors (such as gay and lesbian kids being more likely to be homeless).

Thank you. That was the explanation I was asking for. So, in essence, the graph neither proved nor refuted anything?

[New Kereptica]

Jesus was not a simply a man. He was god in the flesh.

Jesus died. Therefor Jesus is mortal. Being a male mortal, he was thus a man.

[Lemiden]

Also no one is to add or to subtract from the word of god with the exception of Peter and his disiples b/c christ clearly gave him the authority do so.

Really? So someone with the authority from Christ can add or subtract from the bible? I accept that.

Not sure I do. Add sure, if it is in line with the teachings of Christ, and the prophets before him, with Christ being first and foremost. But subtract? I highly doubt this.

Well he is referring to is :
Deut. 4: 2
2 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.

Rev. 22: 18
18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

Most people use these two passages to rebuke the Book of Mormon. "This Book" in Revelations means Revelations. The Bible consists of many different books, all put together. They arent even in cronological order. Deut is referring to the laws:

1 Now therefore hearken, O Israel, unto the statutes and unto the judgments, which I teach you, for to do them, that ye may live, and go in and possess the land which the Lord God of your fathers giveth you.

I tend to come from a "play it safe" mindset. So I am not going to start picking and choosing what do believe.

[Nova Magna Germania]

Yes. And it appeared that your graph substantiated the claim. That is where I was confused. Did the graph refute or substantiate?

You think 14% for men who have sex with men vs 5-15% for the general male population substantiates your claim?

You are saying that 14% of homosexual men were abused and 15% of hetero men were abused, so the abuse has no affect on homosexuality? Fine. That is what I was questioning. However, the sample size seems a bit small.

No, 14% of men who have sex with men (87.7% considered themselves gay or homosexual, rest may consider themselves to be bi or even str8) vs the general male population (str8, bi, gay). First is the result from the study I quoted, 2nd is a Wiki quote (which includes multiple studies).

And it wasnt a census so results can be wrong.

You are simply regurgitating the statistics. What are you conclusions FROM those statistics?

I didnt regurgitate, I corrected you. The conclusion is that your claim about sexual abuse of children being a possible important aspect influencing sexual orientation is NOT necessarily supported. Even if studies show gays and lesbians being more likely to be victims of sexual abuse when they were kids, those may be explained by confounding factors (such as gay and lesbian kids being more likely to be homeless).

Thank you. That was the explanation I was asking for. So, in essence, the graph neither proved nor refuted anything?

Science almost never proves or refutes anything 100%. The short conclusion is that your claim was baseless, like most of your other claims seem to be.

[Camarone]

Jesus from two famous Petrine texts, John 21:15-17 which concludes with “Feed my sheep” and is seen by Catholics as promising the spiritual supremacy to Simon Peter and “by charging him with the superintendency of all his sheep, without exception; and consequently of his whole flock, that is, of his own church,”[54] and Matthew 16:17-20:
I tell you that you are Peter,a and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hadesb will not overcome it.c I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will bed bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will bee loosed in heaven."
– Matthew 16:18-20 (NIV)

[Kobrania]

Jesus from two famous Petrine texts, John 21:15-17 which concludes with “Feed my sheep” and is seen by Catholics as promising the spiritual supremacy to Simon Peter and “by charging him with the superintendency of all his sheep, without exception; and consequently of his whole flock, that is, of his own church,”[54] and Matthew 16:17-20:
I tell you that you are Peter,a and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hadesb will not overcome it.c I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will bed bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will bee loosed in heaven."
– Matthew 16:18-20 (NIV)

Relevancy?

[Camarone]

Jesus died in his mortal state for our sins but he was clearly god in the flesh and then resurected.

[Ascon]

Jesus from two famous Petrine texts, John 21:15-17 which concludes with “Feed my sheep” and is seen by Catholics as promising the spiritual supremacy to Simon Peter and “by charging him with the superintendency of all his sheep, without exception; and consequently of his whole flock, that is, of his own church,”[54] and Matthew 16:17-20:
I tell you that you are Peter,a and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hadesb will not overcome it.c I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will bed bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will bee loosed in heaven."
– Matthew 16:18-20 (NIV)

Just out of curiosity, why would a Catholic be using the NIV as opposed to the Catholic Standard?

[KiloMikeAlpha]

Jesus from two famous Petrine texts, John 21:15-17 which concludes with “Feed my sheep” and is seen by Catholics as promising the spiritual supremacy to Simon Peter and “by charging him with the superintendency of all his sheep, without exception; and consequently of his whole flock, that is, of his own church,”[54] and Matthew 16:17-20:
I tell you that you are Peter,a and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hadesb will not overcome it.c I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will bed bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will bee loosed in heaven."
– Matthew 16:18-20 (NIV)

This is still Peter. Where does he transfer authority?

[New Kereptica]

Jesus died in his mortal state for our sins but he was clearly god in the flesh and then resurected.

But he still died, which means that he was mortal. And I think 'clearly' is a rather dubious phrasing, as it is not at all clear.

[Lemiden]

Jesus was not a simply a man. He was god in the flesh.

Jesus died. Therefor Jesus is mortal. Being a male mortal, he was thus a man.

And he rose again. What man does that?

Do you think Americans having less life expectancy than Canadians is because being American is not right?

First, show me figures. Second, in short, and proportionally, yes. America has a huge problem with gluttony. Obesity tends to lead to chronic problems. hypertension, organ failure, etc. Thus, Americans do have a shorter life span.