The Bible and homosexual behavior

[apothanein kerdos]

Thanks for bringing up Bailey and Dillard

Their study proves that homosexuality is a personality defect and not something inherent in the genes. If it were, then 100% of the identical twins should have been gay (The Innate-Immutable Argument Finds No Basis in Science,

[Bread_of_Life]

Joel,

Please don't try to dabble in science if you havn't actually read the relevant material in question.

Their study proves that homosexuality is a personality defect and not something inherent in the genes. If it were, then 100% of the identical twins should have been gay

This is a completely inaccurate and misleading summary of the twin studies carried out on homosexuality.

Firstly, none of them concluded that homosexuality was a "personality defect". Secondly, they do not show that homosexuality is non-genetic, rather they show that it is not solely genetic. Thirdly, they were carried out with a background of other research showing that homosexuals, on average, had both genealogical and morphological differences from hetrosexuals.

Lastly, you have disregarded the possibility of embryological factors being involved. Twins may come from the same womb, but they are not exposed to the same levels of chemicals in the womb - and various studies have shown linkage between chemical (and especially hormone exposure) in the womb and homosexuality.

Other prominent researchers have concluded that there is no evidence to support a biological theory

I do not know of any prominent researcher who has concluded that there is no biological link to homosexuality. What is clear is that homosexuality is not determinately genetic - that is that genes are not the sole and determinate causal factor leading to homosexuality - this pretty much all researchers agree upon.

However, I do not know of any researcher who believes that genetic and embryological factors do not matter at all - the evidence suggests that they do. This again is a gross misstatement of the current research (which, I take it, you havn't read?)

[Slippery Slope]

Oh slope...I'm waiting for a responce to my post.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm waiting to see if the moderators will allow the discussion to continue and or allow me to participate. I doubt they will cut it off now if they think you may have the upper hand.

Still waiting

-SS

p.s.

Sometimes I forget to use the spell check button too...

[ChadB]

Who cares if gays are gay because of genetics, personal choice, or exposure to hormones in the uterus.

Is it in our genes to sin? Yes

Is it our personal choice to sin? Yes

Do we sin because of exposure to chemicals in the uterus? In some way probably. Exposure to hormones helps to shape us and plays a role in our development.

But the truth is no matter what causes homosexuality it is wrong biblically. If you are a follower of Jesus Christ and believe fully and truly in the word of God then you should also believe sin, in any form is wrong. This includes homosexuality.

Being gay is a sin like any sin; no worse. But what makes the issue is when someone claims to be a Christian and is openly gay; living as if being gay is ok just because popular culture accepts it or because they have the "urge" so its an OK lifestyle.

I have the urge to sin....is it Ok....NOOOOOO!!!

What I am trying to say is.....

Is it in our genes to be gay? For some people

Is it personal choice to be gay? For those who live the gay lifestyle.

Is being gay a result of hormone exposure? Maybe

Is being gay wrong? Yes.

Is supporting the gay lifestyle wrong even if you are not gay? Yes, because that is supporting sin. Supporting an individual who is wronging God and going against what the Creator has established for us.

Man, I love God and am so happy that He has given us His word to live by. Where would we be without it!!!!!!!!!!

[serotta]

I agree with you 100% ChadB. Great post

[Matthitjah]

Slope,

Slope,

I just believe that your argument has run the gamut and now you desire to debate with yourself.

I believe you are incorrect and we were just starting to make some headway in the discussion.

Pointing fingers at God's Children never absolves sin. It just redirects the argument away from you. 

I don't understand what you are talking about?

Now as for pointing to the Bible. I told you I'm pretty dumb.  I defer to the Word of God. God is never wrong. 

That's fine and is expected on a Xian forum but does that mean that people can't have a meaningful discourse too without quoting scripture as well?

I mentioned closing this thread because your exasperration was showing. You told a woman who sincerely answered you, "To lay off the meds." This is a complete distortion of that exchange. She was completely misreading the thread and in a near panic. My comment was light hearted. Go back and look again.

Your pat answer when you cannot come to terms with someone's opinion is to say," Still waiting!"

This is simply not true and at every turn you attempt to paint me in a light that is contrary to my intent.

I tell you the Truth, Pride was the first and greatest fall. Now your answers to Brother Joel are laced with sarcasm. 

That's because I could not take that portion of his response seriously

So what are you really looking for? 

Answers, insight, a sign... what are you looking for?

What answer will satisfy you my friend?

How about some truth.

I can agree to disagree. Will you? How long shall we disagree? 20 pages? Am I a, Fundamentalist, going to change your opinion? Or will I continue to see your heart hardened? Sarcasm flying?

That depends on if we can come to a point where we agree to disagree or find a truth we both agree on. Would you change your opinion if you heard the truth or will you attempt to hide what doesn't appeal to you?

Labeling me a Fundamentalist is just another diversion. Can you live with me being a Fundamentalist? Sincerely I believe every Word of God is True. If you can't live with me? Your gonna have a hard time with God.  He is the ultimate Fundamentalist. 

I didn't label you a fundamentalist, you did.

Come on friend? Our difference of opinion is in that I believe God has spoken.  There are consequences to sin. They are death and seperation from God eternally.

Well that's great but there are other people besides you interested in the discussion.

Now I, a self described Fundamentalist/Zealot, have not once pointed to Scripture in this post. Believe me it has been hard. I think I've worn off a cap grinding down on my teeth in self restraint.    So what will you point fingers at now?

Well, really we are beyond the bible at this point. We have agreed that Xians believe homosexuality is a sin and I'm not disputing that belief.

What are you looking for Slope?

In this discussion I was looking for insight into the Xian position on the topic. In general... I'm not sure, maybe enough discussion on various topics will lead me to an epiphany or something but the more I'm censored, deleted. banned from Xian discussions the farther from Christianity I move.

Peace,

Dave

Slope,

You are accusing me of your own unbelief. That will not wash.

You have come to a Christian site seeking answers. Answers from God are found in the Word of God. Which you reject out of hand. How then shall we answer you?

It seems you have come seeking terms upon which you will believe? Guess what the Terms are God's. He dictates that you my friend are wrong and that He is right. This may cause you to feel uneasy or even be offended? Better to be offended then to go on living a lie.

You say you are looking for answers? Then when they are given your reply is, still waiting. Would it were that God should bend to your will? I'm not looking for anything , save to know my Saviour better. That starts with a healthy fear of God and respect for His Word. You are looking for Truth. That is to be found in God's very Word. If your version of the Truth does not line up with the Word of God? Then you my friend have a problem.

It is not so much with this Christian site? It is not so much with the Fundamentalist/Zealot on the other end? It is not so much the fact that I am entrusted with the Truth here? It is the fact that God has spoken. It is He, God, with whom your problem does begin.

Many here have shown you the consequences of unrestrained Homosexual Marriage. Biblically and Modern day. Spiritually and Physically. Your pat answer is, still waiting. You want someone to tell you that Homosexual Marriage is a civil right. Not being Saved, as you have stated. You will never be able to see the ramifications fully from the guidlines of God's Word. You agree it is a sin. What are the ramifications of unrestrained sin?

Some have tried to show you. The logical discourse of your argument is the dissolution of Marriage as we know it and have known it since the dawn of Creation. Look at what the free wheeling divorce laws have done in the U.S.? These Laws have even ravaged the Church and God's People. As well many millions of disenfranchised youths. We are talking about the core of a society that is founded upon the very principles of the Word of God. Which we now reject out of hand. Simply because they offend our learned opinions of what a civil right is.

It is offensive to some to post the Ten Commandments? So then we lose our moral compass and begin to decide based upon our own foul human heart, what is Righteouss. I told you I am too dumb for that.

I have not stopped the conversation. It is my role here to determine when it reachs an unproductive state. It then begins to descend into bickering. Which has been exhibited here. It seems that my posting a warning to you has shocked you into disbelief. That was a position you held on your own my friend.

I may disagree with you? We may end up agreeing? One things for sure. I will not depart from the Word of God nor posting it here. I will never apologize for my Lord and His Word. I have heard the Truth and it is the Word of God.

I'm not sure, maybe enough discussion on various topics will lead me to an epiphany or something but the more I'm censored, deleted. banned from Xian discussions the farther from Christianity I move.

I will agree with you in principle on this. You need to be around Christian Discussions. Being banned or deleted should promote self examination rather than blame. Remember this is a Christian site and we do deem it neccesary to control the flow of the Discussion to keep the topics on Christ. You are a guest here. We Love having you my friend. As long as you act like the guest you claim to be.

Peace,

Dave

[apothanein kerdos]

Joel,

Please don't try to dabble in science if you havn't actually read the relevant material in question.

Their study proves that homosexuality is a personality defect and not something inherent in the genes. If it were, then 100% of the identical twins should have been gay

This is a completely inaccurate and misleading summary of the twin studies carried out on homosexuality.

Firstly, none of them concluded that homosexuality was a "personality defect". Secondly, they do not show that homosexuality is non-genetic, rather they show that it is not solely genetic. Thirdly, they were carried out with a background of other research showing that homosexuals, on average, had both genealogical and morphological differences from hetrosexuals.

Lastly, you have disregarded the possibility of embryological factors being involved. Twins may come from the same womb, but they are not exposed to the same levels of chemicals in the womb - and various studies have shown linkage between chemical (and especially hormone exposure) in the womb and homosexuality.

Other prominent researchers have concluded that there is no evidence to support a biological theory

I do not know of any prominent researcher who has concluded that there is no biological link to homosexuality. What is clear is that homosexuality is not determinately genetic - that is that genes are not the sole and determinate causal factor leading to homosexuality - this pretty much all researchers agree upon.

However, I do not know of any researcher who believes that genetic and embryological factors do not matter at all - the evidence suggests that they do. This again is a gross misstatement of the current research (which, I take it, you havn't read?)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The conclusion was brought ahead by someone who had studied the issue (check the sources Nik). While I acknowledge that genetics are not the only thing that matters in determining certain things...yet I wish those who believe homosexuality is a natural act would stop attempting to use genes as a definite fact when nothing has been found.

As for the biological factor within it, please explain what research there is that shows homosexuality is a natural occurance within the human mind. It almost reminds me of those who developed a giant sattelite to beam messages out into space and hope for a message. These researchers believe there is a biological link to homosexuality and say there is yet do not hold the facts to back it up.

[Bread_of_Life]

Joel,

I wish those who believe homosexuality is a natural act would stop attempting to use genes as a definite fact when nothing has been found.

Firstly, the scientific debate over homosexuality is not centred around whether homosexuality is natural or unnatural. Indeed, some might argue that it is a "non-question", since homosexuality occurs in nature, and since humans are part of nature. The real questions are "what causes homosexuality?", "is there any genetic pre-disposition to homosexuality?", "is homosexuality inherited?" etc.

The twin studies that you sited do show that a twin whose sibling is homosexual is more likely to be homosexual by some considerable margin - although is far from certain to be a homosexual. This suggests that genes are not the sole causal factor in homosexuality - since if they were, genetically identical people would certainly be homosexual.

That does not mean that genes arn't important. I'll go through the evidence in answer to your next question:

please explain what research there is that shows homosexuality is a natural occurance within the human mind.

Again this question isn't worded in a way that makes it easy to answer. The fact is, no research is ever conducted to show such a conclusion. The word "natural" is so devisive and arguble in definition that a scientific report would rarely state this sort of a finding.

What I can tell you is the research that shows that genetic and embryological factors do affect a person's pre-disposition toward homosexual behaviour (again, homosexuality is a contentious word in science which is why I favour "homosexual behaviour" - people are rarely exclusively homosexual, and there are various degrees of bi-sexuality, from interest and fantasy all the way to exclusive homosexuality).

The first piece of evidence (and I'm happy to reference papers if you wish, and even send some to you in pdf format) is that people who are self-defined homosexuals and bi-sexuals have different 2a/4a finger length ratios than do hetrosexuals. This finger length ratio is strongly causally linked with the levels of foetal androgen exposure - that is, how much a foetus is exposed to certain hormones (androgens) during its time in the womb. A difference in finger length ratios in self-defined homosexual and bisexuals would indicate a difference in foetal androgen concentrations.

This effect was only statistically significant for women btw, although it could help to explain the results of twin studies (more on this later).

The second piece of evidence is genealogical. People who display homosexual behaviour are far more likely to have relatives on their mother's side displaying similar behaviour than relatives on their father's side. This could indicate one of two things, either than there is genetic material on the X chromosome that predisposes men to homosexuality, or that embryological factors affect homosexuality (after all, gestation occurs within the mother, it is her family's genes that will affect embryology most). It was also found btw, interestingly, that the number of children mattered - a second child is considerably more likely to display homosexual behaviour than a first. Embryology and the womb does vary from child to child.

The third piece of evidence is from the twin studies you quoted. Whilst identical twins did not always share homosexual tendancies, they did far more than non-identical twins. Since both identical and non-identical twins share upbringing, scientists concluded that this was evidence that there may be some sort of genetic predisposition to homosexuality, although it wasn't purely determinate, it wasn't the only determining factor.

Lastly, recently scientists have found genetic material on the X-chromosome than homosexuals tend to share. Again, the link is statistical not total, and the findings are currently disputed - they are yet to be repeated that is. But it is still significant nonetheless.

Notice I am yet to use the word "natural".

[ChadB]

What does it matter what causes it? What does that prove? The fact is it is wrong!!! God clearly defines homosexual behavior as an abomination; a sinful act of the flesh. With that said who cares what the cause is??!!

I would bet mass murders and child molesters have some chemical/emotional/relational problems as well. Because murdering is natural for them does that make it right? Just because a child molester has that desire does that make it right? Sure, homosexuality involves willing partners but what does that matter? Its wrong, its a sin, and such behavior is against Gods plan for us.

Ok, now let all those gay supporters start the bashing because I compared child molesters/murders with homosexuals. But its a problem with the person.....

In my opinion homosexual acts between 2 people are 2 individuals with a sinful desire using each others bodies to meet that desire. Willing rape if you will.

[Catsmeow]

The problem I see is that the majority of Christians don't care to show love to homosexuals and help them understand their sin but would rather just stone them to death. 

Still waiting

-SS

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Uh, hey pal...when did you perform a formal, documented and official survey of "most" Christians?

Do you handle official surveys by a major survey group?

Where does "most" come from?

I am always laughing when people come up with these WEAK arguments about "most" Christians.

Slippery, you're on a slippery slope, true to your name.

I not only took seminars and courses on how to love, understand and reach the homosexual community, when I was very young and unsaved, I was a heterosexual who had MANY gay friends and hung out with them at the gay bars.

BTW, I had a neighbor across the street (3 gay men) who I made BOTh a beautiful, holiday Thanksgiving basket full of pumpkin breads, homemade bisquits and spice cookies and a lovely Christian Thanksgiving Card to them. It was gorgeous!

THEN, on Christmas, I brought another basket full of holiday cookies and wonderful gifts for each of them, telling them how much "I" love them and GOD loves them.

I received a LETTER from the owner of the house saying, "Nobody's ever shown us so much love and kindness. I don't know how to thank you."

Now, I don't know if there were ANY Christians on our block. Unlike YOU, I didn't hire a survey company and take a poll.

I knew "I" was a Christian and I knew God said, "Show them My love."

I did.

Take that POLL and think about it for awhile....before you assume MOST Christians do this or that.

Your "polls" are all slippery when wet.