An accidental homosexuality experiment?

[flip]

Sounded like he was. He was also making an incorrect statement.



I know a fair number (admittedly, not a ton) of people who are not religious and were not raised religious, who are homophobic. It usually actually is a result of being raised by homophobes themselves (parents making derogatory remarks in relation to gay people, using "gay" or "fag" as an insult, etc) or raised in a chauvinistic/sexist household, where gender roles were strongly enforced/reinforced. Both of these situations can happen outside of a religious setting, and trying to limit homophobia to merely whether someone is or was raised religious or not does not contribute to the conversation.



You brought religion into the thread, and you steered it towards "is it right or wrong" by indicating that a specific religion says that it's wrong, and claimed that was the only reason for the debate.

And I'm still unsure what your focus on Judaism is - a number of major Christian denominations and Islamic denominations also denounce homosexuality as being "against their creator" or whatnot.



Pull the other one, it's got bells on.

Arguments about religion are banned, not from religious people. Get over your persecution complex.



I was responding to the point that you brought up, not to the OP.



It's an entity that is purported to exist and presumably works as a sort of "ghost in the shell" in the form of consciousness and decision making in (people, animals, other things - choose as many as you'd like). The existence or nonexistence of things still falls under the umbrella of science. Science can tell me that there either is or isn't an invisible dragon in my garage.

Could you then explain where homophobic ideas come from, or do they just come into existence from nowhere, created by magic sparks of logic?

 

[flip]

I'll repeat.

Works do not determine a destination of Heaven or Hell.

No one can earn Heaven.

Heaven is not a reward for works. Hell is not a punishment for lack of works.

Belonging to God, and finding a purpose with life in that faith, can motivate a specific set of morals given by God, in a robust way. I remember a paper showing that a strong faith was a major factor when looking at who survived the death camps in WWII. Though often ethnocentric, missonaries have done a lot to help less lucky people.

The carrot/stick theory is of lesser importance in this perspective, and focusing on that, shows some biased thinking.

Seculars are perhaps more guilty of this thinking. An example is prisons and the penalty system. Are secular people simply projecting their worldviews and basis for their set of morals over to a religious system?

 

[flip]

Np, it's a little bit old school and not commonly used because of the confusion that often comes up -- most people say Abrahamic, I think.

Thanks for explaining to other posters. The reason I used "semitic religions" and not Abrahamic, is because the word semitic includes some ethnicity and also the other ancient semitic religions from the area, that differs from the hellenistic culture, that is known for their admiration of noble homosexual relationships. At least two of the abrahamic religions are clearly influenced by parts of hellenistic thinking. But this is of course just nitpicking and personal interpretations of the two terms. That said, there are traces of homosexual behavior in ancient semitic cultures, too.

 

[Daredevel7]

Could you then explain where homophobic ideas come from, or do they just come into existence from nowhere, created by magic sparks of logic?

Maybe the same place where racism comes from? After all, didn't racist people use the Bible to justify their hate?

Not saying that the Bible is bad but people DO twist the words in the book to fit to their agenda.

Where does ANY hate of a group start from?!?

 

[Reba]

There are a great many who have and do. I see nothing contradictory with someone believing that Jesus is their savior and all of that (yes, oversimplifying), and "continuing to sin". That includes ignoring the fact that naturally all believers who don't convert and then immediately die "continue to sin". You can claim that someone who "truly believes would not do so" and thus anyone who does continue to sin never was a "true believer", but then that's merely because that's how you've defined "true believer" to be, rather than actually having anything to do with a result of belief.

Born-again Christians will commit sins after salvation. The Bible says so. However, they won't continue in sin. That means, they won't live in a continuous pattern of sinful life. They have turned away from the direction of sinful life. When they do sin, they will repent, rather than just ignore the sin and do more.

I John 1:

6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth: 7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. 8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

But seriously, I'm using it more in the sense of extrinsic vs intrinsic decision theory. Legalism (as I'm using it) is the system whereby you are handed a set of rules (stone tablets, if you will) and told that those are defined as "right and wrong". The inherent problem with legalism of this sort is easily seen in the following situation:

1) God is mysterious to humans, and we cannot predict his actions.

God has revealed Himself, and His character, thru His Word. We might not know how He will deal with a certain situation but we can trust that however He does, it will be what is best for us (because of #2).

Why would we need to predict His actions? Can you predict what will happen to you in your daily life? You may have a daily routine but it can be turned upside down at any time.

2) God is superior to humans, which is why we must obey his commands.

The Creator is superior in all ways to the creation and creatures. That's why we can trust Him.

3) God hands you a stone tablet, containing the 11th commandment: Thou Shalt Rape The Virgins.

The Bible is finished. God won't be adding any more to His Word. The time of personal revelation is done.

Also, God doesn't expect a believer to do anything that would contradict His other commandments.

Therefore, you have set up a situation that can't happen.

If the above situation seems unfathomable or impossible to you, then you've either modified that moral framework so that it extends beyond that (in which case it is now subject to your personal control), or you're trying to limit your supposedly omniscient and all-powerful (you left that one out, but I'll assume it was meant to be included) God to merely human feelings, thoughts and emotions.

I didn't list all of God's attributes (there are many more) only for posting time and space. Nothing was intentionally left out. God is definitely all powerful.

 

[jillio]

You should really stick to things that you know.

I don't tell you what psychology teaches, and you don't tell me what my religion teaches.

You have a doctorate in religion? Are you a professor of comparative religion? No, you are simply someone who subscribes to the beliefs of a specific denomination, and as such, hold no authority on what other religions believe. I was responding to a question from Daredevil.

 

[jillio]

No. That would be wrong.

Then why are we discussing religious beliefs as a deterrent to behaviors?

 

[jillio]

Maybe the same place where racism comes from? After all, didn't racist people use the Bible to justify their hate?

Not saying that the Bible is bad but people DO twist the words in the book to fit to their agenda.

Where does ANY hate of a group start from?!?

It has exactly the same roots. A fear of difference. Those that fear the difference in others to the degree that they wish to keep them in an oppressed category, rather than just not interacting with them by choice, use the Bible as justification for that belief.

 

[Reba]

You have a doctorate in religion? Are you a professor of comparative religion? No, you are simply someone who subscribes to the beliefs of a specific denomination, and as such, hold no authority on what other religions believe. I was responding to a question from Daredevil.

I'm posting about the beliefs and doctrines of my religion. I don't need a doctorate in order to explain my own religion.

 

[jillio]

I'm posting about the beliefs and doctrines of my religion. I don't need a doctorate in order to explain my own religion.

Your own religion. Not others. Not everyone who mentions religions is referring to your specific denomination.

 

[Reba]

Then why are we discussing religious beliefs as a deterrent to behaviors?

They are an influence, not a control. People have free will.

 

[jillio]

They are an influence, not a control. People have free will.

But, you are assuming that it is an influence to stop a behavior which you consider to be socially unnacceptable, such as homosexual behavior, correct?

 

[Reba]

But, you are assuming that it is an influence to stop a behavior which you consider to be socially unnacceptable, such as homosexual behavior, correct?

God can influence hearts, and therefor behaviors, to change in all ways. He doesn't force anyone to change.

God doesn't base right and wrong on what is socially acceptable. There are many things that are socially acceptable that are against God's will. Also, what is socially acceptable varies on the society. Each society in time and place is different and changeable. God is constant and unchangeable. He doesn't follow trends or political correctness.

 

[jillio]

God can influence hearts, and therefor behaviors, to change in all ways. He doesn't force anyone to change.

God doesn't base right and wrong on what is socially acceptable. There are many things that are socially acceptable that are against God's will. Also, what is socially acceptable varies on the society. Each society in time and place is different and changeable. God is constant and unchangeable. He doesn't follow trends or political correctness.

That doesn't answer the question.

 

[Reba]

That doesn't answer the question.

Yes, it does. Read it again.

Do you have more questions?

 

[jillio]

Yes, it does. Read it again.

Do you have more questions?

Actually, it doesn't. You have simply told me, in rhetorical fashion, what you believe God does and doesn't do. I asked a yes or no question.

Same one. But let me re-phrase that. You are assuming that it is an influence to stop behavior which you consider to be religiously and morally wrong, correct?

 

[Reba]

Actually, it doesn't. You have simply told me, in rhetorical fashion, what you believe God does and doesn't do. I asked a yes or no question.

Same one. But let me re-phrase that. You are assuming that it is an influence to stop behavior which you consider to be religiously and morally wrong, correct?

When you phrase your questions like the "When did you quit beating your wife" question, then a simple yes or no won't suffice.

I'm not assuming anything.

I'm stating that "it" (my religious beliefs) are an influence on those who believe the same to stop their sinful behaviors.

 

[jillio]

When you phrase your questions like the "When did you quit beating your wife" question, then a simple yes or no won't suffice.

I'm not assuming anything.

I'm stating that "it" (my religious beliefs) are an influence on those who believe the same to stop their sinful behaviors.

Again, since this is a thread about homosexuality, do you consider homosexuality to be a "sinful behavior" instead of an innate, biologically determined characteristic? And, if you do consider it to be a sinful behavior, do you believe that homosexuality can be eradicated with religion?

 

[Reba]

Again, since this is a thread about homosexuality, do you consider homosexuality to be a "sinful behavior" instead of an innate, biologically determined characteristic?

Sexual acts between two people of the same sex is a sin.

And, if you do consider it to be a sinful behavior, do you believe that homosexuality can be eradicated with religion?

"Religion?" No.

 

[jillio]

Sexual acts between two people of the same sex is a sin.


"Religion?" No.

Thank you. You finally answered the questions.

According to your belief system, sexual acts between 2 people of the same sex is a sin. In that case, I would say it would probably be in your best interest not to become involved in a homosexual relationship.

However, there are those that do not consider it to be a sin. It is theirs to judge their own behavior, and you to judge yours.