# Are gays born gay?



## BoneHunter77 (Mar 20, 2013)

I'm a christian and have found some pretty substantial evidence in the bible (Matthew and Romans) speaking on this subject. My wife and I differ on this topic. She thinks gays are born gay but I disagree. What say you?


----------



## stringmusic (Mar 20, 2013)

Absolutely not.


----------



## blood on the ground (Mar 20, 2013)

no way, pure choice!


----------



## BoneHunter77 (Mar 20, 2013)

My wife raises this verse: “Not everyone can accept this teaching, but only those to whom it is given. For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let anyone accept this who can.” (Matthew 19:11-12)

Here Jesus identifies three classes of men who should not marry women. Taking his categories in reverse order, first, there are those who have made themselves “eunuchs” for the kingdom of heaven, i.e., those who foreswear marriage to better serve God. Second, he mentions those who have been “made eunuchs by others,” an apparent reference to castrated males. But Jesus mentions a third category — eunuchs who were born that way. Some might argue that Jesus was referring to males born without testicles, but this would be extremely rare.

I just don't buy into this. God specifically says in other scripture that gays will not inherit the kingdom of God. If that is true and all his creation is good in the eye of the Lord than how could they be created gay?


----------



## blood on the ground (Mar 20, 2013)

Not trying to take this away from the religious side of your discussion but I believe most homosexuality is a coping mechanism that is a response to very dysfunctional situations.


----------



## gemcgrew (Mar 20, 2013)

BoneHunter77 said:


> I'm a christian and have found some pretty substantial evidence in the bible (Matthew and Romans) speaking on this subject. My wife and I differ on this topic. She thinks gays are born gay but I disagree. What say you?


I would say that whether or not they are born that way, is irrelevant. God says it is wrong, so it is wrong to do it. In the context of "born that way" or "choice", it does not matter. It is sin and requires repentance and correction.


----------



## rjcruiser (Mar 20, 2013)

BoneHunter77 said:


> Jesus mentions a third category — eunuchs who were born that way.



Been so from birth doesn't mean they were born that way.  That's like saying Samson was a Nazarite from birth...therefore he was born that way and had no choice.



gemcgrew said:


> I would say that whether or not they are born that way, is irrelevant. God says it is wrong, so it is wrong to do it. In the context of "born that way" or "choice", it does not matter. It is sin and requires repentance and correction.



Very good point.


----------



## stringmusic (Mar 20, 2013)

blood on the ground said:


> Not trying to take this away from the religious side of your discussion but I believe most homosexuality is a coping mechanism that is a response to very dysfunctional situations.



Nailed it.


----------



## Ronnie T (Mar 20, 2013)

gemcgrew said:


> I would say that whether or not they are born that way, is irrelevant. God says it is wrong, so it is wrong to do it. In the context of "born that way" or "choice", it does not matter. It is sin and requires repentance and correction.



Precisely.

I grew up with two young men, twins, who were always feminine.  Even as very young toddlers.  Then as adolescents.  And even now as adults.  They are male in body only.  It isn't a matter of my opinion, or their parents opinion.....they were born this way.  They've never dated, never married, but they are attracted to males rather than females.
But, scriptures stand as given and received.
But the scriptures stand for themselves.


----------



## humdandy (Mar 20, 2013)

Straight folks need to stop having gay babies.


----------



## JB0704 (Mar 20, 2013)

I believe they are born gay in most cases.  We can discuss "god's plan" and all, but folks have genetic dispositions to many afflictions which we would say are not "god's plan."  

I do think there are many circumstances of "nurture" causing an individual to develop thinking patterns outside what they are naturally designed for.....but, in most cases, I think folks are just born that way.  I know of a little boy in k-3 who loves wearing high heels and dresses


----------



## gemcgrew (Mar 20, 2013)

JB0704 said:


> I believe they are born gay in most cases.


I believe all men are born wicked in every case and unable to obey God's law. Because of this, they are sinful and unable to change. That is why they need Christ to save them. 



JB0704 said:


> We can discuss "god's plan" and all, but folks have genetic dispositions to many afflictions which we would say are not "god's plan."


I wouldn't say it. Who created the genetic dispositions? "And the LORD said unto him, Who hath made man's mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the LORD?"


----------



## grouper throat (Mar 20, 2013)

My mom has a distant cousin who I (and most of my family) think  has a little sugar in his tank. He's never really dated, has  feminine qualities and mannerisms, works in a predominantly female field of work, etc. but loves the Lord and is very devoted to his church and family. So I feel as if he can control his gay tendencies if he has them at all. 

I never believed in people being 'born gay' before this but I am more apt to believe it now in some cases.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Mar 20, 2013)

Wouldn't it be un-natural for a homosexual to have sex with a heterosexual?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Mar 20, 2013)

gemcgrew said:


> I believe all men are born wicked in every case and unable to obey God's law. Because of this, they are sinful and unable to change. That is why they need Christ to save them.
> 
> 
> I wouldn't say it. Who created the genetic dispositions? "And the LORD said unto him, Who hath made man's mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the LORD?"



Using your logic, God made them Gay as God makes everthing. He made some people with different quanities of male and female body parts and DNA as in intersexed individuals. Who do they have sex with?


----------



## dawg2 (Mar 20, 2013)

BoneHunter77 said:


> .... My wife and I differ on this topic. She thinks gays are born gay but I disagree. What say you?



Nobody really knows.


----------



## JB0704 (Mar 20, 2013)

gemcgrew said:


> I wouldn't say it. Who created the genetic dispositions?



I understand.  You are very consistent.

What bugs me about this issue is that folks will shout to the heavens that folks choose to be gay, but they will readily admit that things can go awry in nature 

I believe the act itself is a choice.  The disposition is not in most cases.


----------



## Lowjack (Mar 20, 2013)

Never seen a news paper announcement that says , Mr and Mrs Jones announces the birth of an 8 Lbs Gay boy" ?? Have you ?


----------



## DCHunter (Mar 20, 2013)

JB0704 said:


> I understand.  You are very consistent.
> 
> What bugs me about this issue is that folks will shout to the heavens that folks choose to be gay, but they will readily admit that things can go awry in nature
> 
> I believe the act itself is a choice.  The disposition is not in most cases.



That's my opinion as well.


----------



## Jim Thompson (Mar 20, 2013)

dawg2 said:


> Nobody really knows.



nope nobody does...well except the gay person.


personally I believe they are born that way.  they of course have the option of acting on it or not and then of course its entirely up to them whether they believe its wrong or not.


----------



## OleCountryBoy (Mar 20, 2013)

We are all born to sin, each and every one of us.  Nobody knows why, just like nobody knows why some humans are born with autism, or born with no emotions or conscience, predisposed to be mean or selfish.  I believe homosexuality is caused by a personality disorder.  There are many personality disorders pushing one to sin, some lead to strong tendencies for extreme alcoholism, gambling, immorality, drug abuse, etc.  

Our churches are full of sinners of all types, we aren't called to judge, we are called to Love.


----------



## BoneHunter77 (Mar 20, 2013)

JB0704 said:


> I believe the act itself is a choice.  The disposition is not in most cases.



This is what I believe. It's just so hard to say for sure. I don't enjoy misinterpreting the Bible because as a Christian I feel its my duty to understand it accurately in order to spread the word to others in the way God intended. But some subjects aren't so cut and dry.


----------



## gemcgrew (Mar 20, 2013)

BoneHunter77 said:


> This is what I believe. It's just so hard to say for sure. I don't enjoy misinterpreting the Bible because as a Christian I feel its my duty to understand it accurately in order to spread the word to others in the way God intended. But some subjects aren't so cut and dry.


I would say that this is one very "cut and dry" subject. Paul, in (Romans 1:26,27,32), uses homosexuality as a prime example of wickedness. This judgment is offensive to the homosexual and to many non Christians. A sizable part of contemporary Church finds it offensive as well and offers us some pretty stupid arguments in favor of such behavior. 

I have heard from professing Christians, "but they love each other and they can't help who they fall in love with". Well, no they don't. In fact, they hate each other and use each other to satisfy lust. Love would say, "Do not do this, it will incur the wrath of God and punishment!"


----------



## gemcgrew (Mar 20, 2013)

Artfuldodger said:


> Using your logic, God made them Gay as God makes everthing. He made some people with different quanities of male and female body parts and DNA as in intersexed individuals. Who do they have sex with?



And why is it that man is made wicked? Study your Bible. Why do we speak lies as soon as we are born (Psalm 58:3)? Go back to the Garden and study it.


----------



## hummdaddy (Mar 20, 2013)

i have many gay and bisexual friends and they all  gay friends say "they knew at a very young age they were attracted to the same sex"...this is your truly gay people ...then there are  bisexuals that i call trysexuals,because they will be sexually active with a male or female...bisexuals are usually over stimulated in a sexual nature or have had something traumatic happen in their life ,and they want to try something new...

just what i know from my conversations in this country!!!


----------



## mtnwoman (Mar 20, 2013)

dawg2 said:


> Nobody really knows.



I agree.

I have a gay guy friend that I'm quite sure wouldn't be gay if he wasn't molested as a child by an uncle.

Then again, I can look at some young boys and they look  effeminate and they are too young to even know that they might be gay.  I think our genes are all messed up since the fall of man. Like some children have genetic disorders or diseases or illnesses that go far back in the family.


----------



## Oldstick (Mar 20, 2013)

dawg2 said:


> Nobody really knows.



I tend to agree.  If someone tells you they have a headache, how do you argue with them and say no you don't have a headache???  Only they know they the truth.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Mar 20, 2013)

gemcgrew said:


> And why is it that man is made wicked? Study your Bible. Why do we speak lies as soon as we are born (Psalm 58:3)? Go back to the Garden and study it.



Forget just gays, why would God make anyone evil and not give them a chance to repent? Why can't a gay person have the choice to become a Christian and repent?


----------



## OleCountryBoy (Mar 20, 2013)

Artfuldodger said:


> Forget just gays, why would God make anyone evil and not give them a chance to repent? Why can't a gay person have the choice to become a Christian and repent?



 there are many gay Christians, drunkard Christians, adulterous Christians, hateful Christians, thieving Christians, murderous Christians.   Sin is sin, there's no difference in gays being gay and you lusting after some hot thing walking down the mall.  I am a Christian but I still have struggles and failure in the areas God designed in me to be weak.   I may not have the same weaknesses 
as you or the next man but we all have them.


----------



## gemcgrew (Mar 20, 2013)

OleCountryBoy said:


> there are many gay Christians, drunkard Christians, adulterous Christians, hateful Christians, thieving Christians, murderous Christians.


That is cool. Here, let me try.
There are no gay Christians, drunkard Christians, adulterous Christians, hateful Christians, thieving Christians, murderous Christians.

Now that I got that out of the way, let me back it up with Scripture.
"Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God." (1 Corinthians 6:9,10)

So now we know that homosexuals, adulterers, idolaters, thieves, prostitutes are lumped together. God says that if you are a homosexual, adulterer, idolater etc., you will go to he11.

Verse 11 gives us hope. "And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God."

If you are a "gay Christian", you are in fact a "gay non Christian".


----------



## Artfuldodger (Mar 20, 2013)

Verse 11 gives us hope. "And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God."

What is verse 11 telling us? That we don't sin anymore as Christians or is the committed deeds just not called sins when Christians perform them?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Mar 20, 2013)

Galatians 5:19 The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20 idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will NOT INHERIT the kingdom of God.

Is the Kingdom of God Heaven? Are you trying to tell me Christians don't have fits of rage, selfish ambition, or envy?


----------



## OleCountryBoy (Mar 20, 2013)

gemcgrew said:


> That is cool. Here, let me try.
> There are no gay Christians, drunkard Christians, adulterous Christians, hateful Christians, thieving Christians, murderous Christians.
> 
> Now that I got that out of the way, let me back it up with Scripture.
> ...


All Christians SIN, including you!


----------



## gemcgrew (Mar 20, 2013)

OleCountryBoy said:


> All Christians SIN, including you!


Is this your defense or an admission? Is this how you legitimize homosexuality? Did you not say that there are homosexual Christians? If so, show it! Scripture please.

We can both be wrong but we can not both be right. One of us or both of us needs to repent and beg God to correct our thinking. Again, Paul said "do not be deceived".


----------



## gemcgrew (Mar 20, 2013)

Artfuldodger said:


> What is verse 11 telling us? That we don't sin anymore as Christians or is the committed deeds just not called sins when Christians perform them?


Is this really so difficult? Paul told the Corinthians that "some of you were". He did not say that "some of you are". Would that not indicate that they no longer are what they were?

In my short lifetime, homosexuality was so disgusting and perverted that it was not openly discussed. Now I find myself having to debate professing Christians on whether or not it is even a sin or an accepted Christian lifestyle. 

Am I so alone in my understanding?


----------



## Ronnie T (Mar 21, 2013)

gemcgrew said:


> Is this really so difficult? Paul told the Corinthians that "some of you were". He did not say that "some of you are". Would that not indicate that they no longer are what they were?
> 
> In my short lifetime, homosexuality was so disgusting and perverted that it was not openly discussed. Now I find myself having to debate professing Christians on whether or not it is even a sin or an accepted Christian lifestyle.
> 
> Am I so alone in my understanding?



No.  You're not alone in your understanding.

1John 2:4 The one who says, “I have come to know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him; 5 but whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected. By this we know that we are in Him: 6 the one who says he abides in Him ought himself to walk in the same manner as He walked.

An adulterer who is comfortable in their adultery, even though they've repented of it and have asked God to forgive them, and if they expect to continue living in their adultery, do not know God.

Same goes for homosexuality, etc.

That person might commit a sin, but they are not permitted, by God, to live in that sin.  God requires repentance.


----------



## glynr329 (Mar 21, 2013)

It depends if you are gay and need justification.


----------



## hobbs27 (Mar 21, 2013)

No gays are not born gay.I wasnt born straight or gay, I never even thought about it until I was preteen around 10 or so with an increasing interest in girls each year.I never even understood girls until.....well I still dont understand them but they sure look different to me as an adult vs when I was a kid.


----------



## LEON MANLEY (Mar 21, 2013)

Are people natural born serial killers, wife beaters, and child molesters, or do they have to work at it?


----------



## formula1 (Mar 21, 2013)

*Re:*

I post the following scriptures not just to the subject at hand, but to sin in general.  One must examine themselves to see if they are in the faith, constantly and always!  You could be deceived!

1 John 1
5 This is the message we have heard from him and proclaim to you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. 6 If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth. 

1 John 2
15 Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 16 For all that is in the world—the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride of life—is not from the Father but is from the world. 17 And the world is passing away along with its desires, but whoever does the will of God abides forever.

1 John 3
4 Everyone who makes a practice of sinning also practices lawlessness; sin is lawlessness. 5 You know that he appeared in order to take away sins, and in him there is no sin. 6 No one who abides in him keeps on sinning; no one who keeps on sinning has either seen him or known him. 7 Little children, let no one deceive you. Whoever practices righteousness is righteous, as he is righteous. 8 Whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil. 9 No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God's seed abides in him, and he cannot keep on sinning because he has been born of God. 10 By this it is evident who are the children of God, and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is the one who does not love his brother.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Mar 21, 2013)

Practices sinning, lives in sin, continues to sin. 
What is the difference of those vs Christians who sin? When I sin i'm pretty sure i do it on purpose. I didn't accidently sin unless I didn't know it was a sin. We aren't under the law but we are under"not sinning" which sounds just like being under the law to me. The only difference I see is Jesus dying for our sins. Our sins are now redeemed. We are saved by grace.
What am I missing?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Mar 21, 2013)

gemcgrew said:


> Is this really so difficult? Paul told the Corinthians that "some of you were". He did not say that "some of you are". Would that not indicate that they no longer are what they were?
> 
> In my short lifetime, homosexuality was so disgusting and perverted that it was not openly discussed. Now I find myself having to debate professing Christians on whether or not it is even a sin or an accepted Christian lifestyle.
> 
> Am I so alone in my understanding?



What i'm getting at is, it sounds like you are saying Christians never sin. This is different from what I believe. I understand the difference between living in sin and the occasional sin. I thought the reason Jesus died was for our sins because we don't have the power to quit sinning. Is it your belief that Christians gain the impossibility of sinning by the Holy Spirit living in them?


----------



## LEON MANLEY (Mar 21, 2013)

If it wasn't for sinners, the church would be empty.


----------



## rjcruiser (Mar 21, 2013)

Artfuldodger said:


> Practices sinning, lives in sin, continues to sin.
> What is the difference of those vs Christians who sin?



Repentance....a desire to change....a desire to please God.


----------



## humdandy (Mar 21, 2013)

stringmusic said:


> Absolutely not.





blood on the ground said:


> no way, pure choice!



So, are they raised to be gay?

Or better yet, are people born straight or raised to be straight?


----------



## jrickman (Mar 21, 2013)

Homosexuality is the only sin I can think of which a person generally allows to become an official part of their identity, often using it to describe themselves before anything else.


----------



## JB0704 (Mar 21, 2013)

jrickman said:


> Homosexuality is the only sin I can think of which a person generally allows to become an official part of their identity, often using it to describe themselves before anything else.





Have you ever watched "American Pie?"


----------



## stringmusic (Mar 21, 2013)

humdandy said:


> So, are they raised to be gay?
> 
> Or better yet, are people born straight or raised to be straight?



I don't think they are necessasarily raised to be gay, but I think childhood and teenage years plays a big role in it.

I don't think it's natural to be born gay, if it were, I think there would be, at least by now, ways doctors could tell if a baby was gay or not.

If a baby is born with an unatural abnormality, we can usually tell what happened. From my understanding, there is no difference in brain functionality in a gay person, and a natural straight person.

This is just my opinion on the subject, and it could be completely wrong, I don't really care either way.


----------



## blood on the ground (Mar 21, 2013)

humdandy said:


> So, are they raised to be gay?
> 
> Or better yet, are people born straight or raised to be straight?





blood on the ground said:


> Not trying to take this away from the religious side of your discussion but I believe most homosexuality is a coping mechanism that is a response to very dysfunctional situations.



This


----------



## Ronnie T (Mar 21, 2013)

Artfuldodger said:


> Practices sinning, lives in sin, continues to sin.
> What is the difference of those vs Christians who sin? When I sin i'm pretty sure i do it on purpose. I didn't accidently sin unless I didn't know it was a sin. We aren't under the law but we are under"not sinning" which sounds just like being under the law to me. The only difference I see is Jesus dying for our sins. Our sins are now redeemed. We are saved by grace.
> What am I missing?



You're missing that heart that's touched that God would ever forgive you of a sin you committed.  You're missing being dedicated to godliness and God's ways.  You think you've joined a club, rather than giving yourself to a new life in Christ.  You've sold yourself in an attempt to get to heaven.  
You need to learn to REPENT.  Stop what it is that you're doing that's unbecoming of a soul kissed by the Spirit of God.

That's what so many are today missing.
.


----------



## gemcgrew (Mar 21, 2013)

Artfuldodger said:


> Practices sinning, lives in sin, continues to sin.
> What is the difference of those vs Christians who sin? When I sin i'm pretty sure i do it on purpose. I didn't accidently sin unless I didn't know it was a sin. We aren't under the law but we are under"not sinning" which sounds just like being under the law to me. The only difference I see is Jesus dying for our sins. Our sins are now redeemed. We are saved by grace.
> What am I missing?


There are two types of people in this world, Christians and non Christians. Non Christians are controlled by their sinful nature. Paul said to Christians, "But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you."

The Christian is ruled by the Spirit and submits to God. The non Christian is ruled by sin and can not submit to God. Are we "setting our affection on things above" or are we setting our desires on self and the pleasure of sin?

If we are living a wicked lifestyle, it is a good indication that we are non Christian.


----------



## dawg2 (Mar 21, 2013)

LEON MANLEY said:


> Are people natural born serial killers, wife beaters, and child molesters, or do they have to work at it?



Science says yes: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...dark-patch-inside-brains-killers-rapists.html

http://neurocritic.blogspot.com/2013/02/the-evil-patch-in-brains-central-lobe.html


----------



## Artfuldodger (Mar 21, 2013)

Ronnie T said:


> You're missing that heart that's touched that God would ever forgive you of a sin you committed.  You're missing being dedicated to godliness and God's ways.  You think you've joined a club, rather than giving yourself to a new life in Christ.  You've sold yourself in an attempt to get to heaven.
> You need to learn to REPENT.  Stop what it is that you're doing that's unbecoming of a soul kissed by the Spirit of God.
> 
> That's what so many are today missing.
> .



So what you are saying is Repenting is the thing i'm missing? That Christians still sin but must repent and ask for forgiveness? Not being under the Law does not give me an excuse to sin?


----------



## Ronnie T (Mar 21, 2013)

Artfuldodger said:


> So what you are saying is Repenting is the thing i'm missing? That Christians still sin but must repent and ask for forgiveness? Not being under the Law does not give me an excuse to sin?



"Must" or "will".
Christians aren't obsessed with sins.  Christians are obsessed with their Lord.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Mar 21, 2013)

Ronnie T said:


> "Must" or "will".
> Christians aren't obsessed with sins.  Christians are obsessed with their Lord.



We sure discuss sins a lot not to be obsessed with them .I think I understand what you are saying though. Christians don't have to worry about sinning as the fruit of them not sinning is proof of their Christianity. If we live the Christian life, we won't be sinning anyway.
What is the purpose of all the New Testament Commandents, rules, laws, or what ever you want to call them? Why are they presented as rules instead of fruitful proofs? They are presented more as commands than just a list of the fruits of Christianship.


----------



## Oldstick (Mar 21, 2013)

Big difference between someone being born gay and someone being born gay and then choosing to let that lead them into a sinful lifestyle.

The being gay or having homosexual attractions they cannot do anything about is not the sin.


----------



## LEON MANLEY (Mar 21, 2013)

dawg2 said:


> Science says yes: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...dark-patch-inside-brains-killers-rapists.html
> 
> http://neurocritic.blogspot.com/2013/02/the-evil-patch-in-brains-central-lobe.html



Then I guess we should socially accept them also?


----------



## dawg2 (Mar 21, 2013)

LEON MANLEY said:


> Then I guess we should socially accept them also?



Did I say that?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Mar 21, 2013)

Oldstick said:


> Big difference between someone being born gay and someone being born gay and then choosing to let that lead them into a sinful lifestyle.
> 
> The being gay or having homosexual attractions they cannot do anything about is not the sin.



Should they have un-natural for them sex/marriage  or stay celibate and single?


----------



## blood on the ground (Mar 21, 2013)

I think you all have getting away from the topic.
are gays born gay?


----------



## olcowman (Mar 21, 2013)

grouper throat said:


> My mom has a distant cousin who I (and most of my family) think  has a little sugar in his tank. He's never really dated, has  feminine qualities and mannerisms, works in a predominantly female field of work, etc. but loves the Lord and is very devoted to his church and family. So I feel as if he can control his gay tendencies if he has them at all.
> 
> I never believed in people being 'born gay' before this but I am more apt to believe it now in some cases.



Kinda' funny how when they 'come out of the closet' that they suddenly become a 'distant' relative ain't it? We got one of them in our family too...

 My cousin Hank, he growed up with the rest of us, but looking back on it he just wasn't never real crazy about running the woods with the boys, or hunting n' fishing and such things we did when we was little. Hank was real fond of a hanging out with the girls, listening to the radio, and a dancing and such... well he up and went off somewhere's overseas with the Peace Corps for a spell. When he come back his name was Henri' and he went to cutting hair at a beauty shop. His mama blamed it on the Peace Corp...

I ain't sure what went wrong... but I do recall that we always thought it was real odd that he always slept with his socks on? I'm thinking that might've been some kinda sign or something regarding his impending sexual orientation? I don't know... but I can tell you one thing, when he come outta the closet he really 'come out'... blowed out and tore the door off behind him! That there is when he become our 'distant' cousin...


----------



## rjcruiser (Mar 21, 2013)

blood on the ground said:


> I think you all have getting away from the topic.
> are gays born gay?



eehh...it's the spiritual discussion forum.  Everything gets off topic before we hit page 2.


----------



## blood on the ground (Mar 21, 2013)

rjcruiser said:


> eehh...it's the spiritual discussion forum.  Everything gets off topic before we hit page 2.



10-4 brother


----------



## Oldstick (Mar 21, 2013)

Artfuldodger said:


> Should they have un-natural for them sex/marriage  or stay celibate and single?



Heck if I know.  

But I do know people (some are relatives) that say they've had sexual attractions toward their own sex (instead of opposite) from as early in their childhood as they can remember.  And some admit they would definitely change that if there was any way they could.  

So I certainly don't have any basis to think they are lying about it.


----------



## mtnwoman (Mar 21, 2013)

LEON MANLEY said:


> If it wasn't for sinners, the church would be empty.


----------



## mtnwoman (Mar 21, 2013)

rjcruiser said:


> eehh...it's the spiritual discussion forum.  Everything gets off topic before we hit page 2.


----------



## JB0704 (Mar 22, 2013)

LEON MANLEY said:


> All this is nothing more than a cop out, and need to be removed from the gene pool.



What other genetic defects would you imagine need to be removed from the gene pool?  Down's syndrome?  Parkinsons?  Epilepsy?





LEON MANLEY said:


> In my opinion, gays can do what they please, so long as they are not harming anyone else, but either shut up or get back in the closet.



Hmmm....I am assuming you are coming from a Christian perspectvie, so I will ask you.....do you think folks who are very bold in their "straightness" should "shut up?"  

I never see Christians complaining real loud about the "Godaddy.com" commercials during the superbowl.  Heck, a trip to Hooters isn't out of the question for most, and let's face it, the food there isn't that good.

How about the random cuts during football coverage to the cheerleaders?

Yes, from a firm interpretation, every one of the items above would cause a person to sin (lust, etc).

So, to those Christians who think that it's ok to bash gay folks, but not straight "sinners" I think it's time to become a little more consistent with your outrage.

Otherwise, it's just plain old hypocracy.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Mar 22, 2013)

JB0704 said:


> What other genetic defects would you imagine need to be removed from the gene pool?  Down's syndrome?  Parkinsons?  Epilepsy?
> Hmmm....I am assuming you are coming from a Christian perspectvie, so I will ask you.....do you think folks who are very bold in their "straightness" should "shut up?"
> 
> I never see Christians complaining real loud about the "Godaddy.com" commercials during the superbowl.  Heck, a trip to Hooters isn't out of the question for most, and let's face it, the food there isn't that good.
> ...



That is also my biggest complaint  that we seem to be against their sin more than cheating on our income tax or padding a bill for the insurance company.

In regards to how people are born, what about the intersexed? Who should they have sex with? There are variations of intersexed individuals as we find out with testing for Olympic gender verification. Example:
 Such accusations go back at least half a century. The IOC adopted its first set of gender tests in the 1960s, with “nude parades” that were exactly what they sound like: female competitors made to walk naked before a panel of judges. But as the IOC later realized, what’s on the outside doesn’t always match what’s on the inside, so the committee moved on to chromosome testing. Once it was shown that women can have a single X chromosome (just as men can have two of them) that was abandoned as well. Then came SRY gene detection (the gene that triggers male sex determination), but after the Atlanta games, in which 8 women tested positive for it, and all were cleared for competition, this method, too, was deemed insufficient. A decade ago, the committee decided to chuck the testing altogether. But in the wake of Semenya’s case, and the international scrutiny it prompted, the IOC announced that it would try, once again, to devise a way to decisively determine what makes a woman a woman.


----------



## LEON MANLEY (Mar 22, 2013)

JB0704 said:


> What other genetic defects would you imagine need to be removed from the gene pool?  Down's syndrome?  Parkinsons?  Epilepsy?
> 
> 
> I've never heard of these folks complaining about being discriminated against, or wanting special treatment.
> ...



I would suggest that if you are going to quote some, quote it all not just take something out of context.

I'm almost positive that I put all these "I'm special I get preferential treatment" folks that are born with their self proclaimed disorders in the same category.


----------



## hobbs27 (Mar 22, 2013)

Its a good thing the law was fulfilled by Jesus.


----------



## LEON MANLEY (Mar 22, 2013)

Artfuldodger said:


> That is also my biggest complaint  that we seem to be against their sin more than cheating on our income tax or padding a bill for the insurance company.
> 
> In regards to how people are born, what about the intersexed? Who should they have sex with? There are variations of intersexed individuals as we find out with testing for Olympic gender verification. Example:
> Such accusations go back at least half a century. The IOC adopted its first set of gender tests in the 1960s, with “nude parades” that were exactly what they sound like: female competitors made to walk naked before a panel of judges. But as the IOC later realized, what’s on the outside doesn’t always match what’s on the inside, so the committee moved on to chromosome testing. Once it was shown that women can have a single X chromosome (just as men can have two of them) that was abandoned as well. Then came SRY gene detection (the gene that triggers male sex determination), but after the Atlanta games, in which 8 women tested positive for it, and all were cleared for competition, this method, too, was deemed insufficient. A decade ago, the committee decided to chuck the testing altogether. But in the wake of Semenya’s case, and the international scrutiny it prompted, the IOC announced that it would try, once again, to devise a way to decisively determine what makes a woman a woman.



They usually have a vagina.
Here's your sign.

Wow and to think I solved the age old mystery without wasting millions of taxpayer's money.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Mar 22, 2013)

LEON MANLEY said:


> They usually have a vagina.
> Here's your sign.
> 
> Wow and to think I solved the age old mystery without wasting millions of taxpayer's money.



What if they have a vagina and testicles?
What if they have a penis and ovaries?
They could have a variation between those two producing various hormones causes by various genes.


----------



## ALLBEEF (Mar 22, 2013)

gemcgrew said:


> I would say that whether or not they are born that way, is irrelevant. God says it is wrong, so it is wrong to do it. In the context of "born that way" or "choice", it does not matter. It is sin and requires repentance and correction.



This is what I say as well..


----------



## Ronnie T (Mar 22, 2013)

This is not a "beat up" the bad guys thread.
This is the spiritual forum, not the political forum.
I'm deleting stuff already.


----------



## JB0704 (Mar 22, 2013)

LEON MANLEY said:


> I would suggest that if you are going to quote some, quote it all not just take something out of context.



I quoted the summary lines, so as to keep my post as brief as possible.  If you want to clarify your context, I will be more than happy to admit my error.  Otherwise, the question remains.....

What other genetic flaws should be removed?


----------



## Bucky T (Mar 22, 2013)

Born that way.


----------



## LEON MANLEY (Mar 22, 2013)

JB0704 said:


> I quoted the summary lines, so as to keep my post as brief as possible.  If you want to clarify your context, I will be more than happy to admit my error.  Otherwise, the question remains.....
> 
> What other genetic flaws should be removed?



I guess it went over your head. 
They don't have to be removed. 
If you leave them alone they will sort themselves out.

I just don't see changing the majority, to cater to the few.

I guess I'm just not into the pity me or you syndrome.

I guess you buy into the ADD and the ADHD also?

I guess you also support the Fed. Govt. Dept. of Education?
You know, no kid left behind. Dumb down America.

Just because someone is born with one foot, doesn't mean that the shoe stores should start selling shoes individually.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Mar 22, 2013)

First off intersexed people are born that way so it's not nice to associate them as only circus workers as they can perform regular jobs as you and me.
My association was as with the eunuchs and gay people, some are born that way. There might be a genitic possibility. 
Even if there is not Gay people aren't Gay just to get attention. I would think it would be just the opposite and would think most people keep quiet about it because of societies outlook on homosexuality.
Still who are the intersexed to have sex with and with the varying degress of being intercexed, an individual might not know they are part male/female as there is more to it than external body parts. Will they be punished for having sex with the wrong gender?
I'm just showing a genetic relationship, not saying it's right or wrong for gay people to have un-natural sex.
It might even be wrong for heterosexual people to practice un-natural sex.

Genetic possibility?
quote;For an evolutionary biologist, homosexuality is something of a puzzle. It’s a common trait, found in up to 10% of the population. It appears to be run in families, suggesting that it is hereditary, at least in part. And yet it defies the very reason why traits are passed on from generation to generation. How could something that hinders childbearing be passed down so frequently from parents to children?

Read more: http://healthland.time.com/2012/12/...genetic-roots-of-homosexuality/#ixzz2OHkc2Gcv


----------



## Jim Thompson (Mar 22, 2013)

LEON MANLEY said:


> Just because someone is born with one foot, doesn't mean that the shoe stores should start selling shoes individually.



very very true...altho if the shoe stores and their patrons ridiculed them and called them sinners for only having one foot I would be ok with not shopping at the store any longer

its ok for folks to hop on one foot as long as their hopping dont interfere with my life liberty or of course my pursuit of happiness.


----------



## JB0704 (Mar 22, 2013)

LEON MANLEY said:


> I guess it went over your head



Maybe.  I don't really care either way.



LEON MANLEY said:


> I just don't see changing the majority, to cater to the few.



I don't think anybody is calling for that in this thread.  You seem determined to argue against it, though.  However, you did bring eugenics into the discussion, which I found....informative.



LEON MANLEY said:


> I guess I'm just not into the pity me or you syndrome.



Ok.




LEON MANLEY said:


> I guess you buy into the ADD and the ADHD also?



Hmmm....how is that relevant?

Oh, and...no.



LEON MANLEY said:


> I guess you also support the Fed. Govt. Dept. of Education?
> You know, no kid left behind. Dumb down America.



How is that relvant?

And, again....no.




LEON MANLEY said:


> Just because someone is born with one foot, doesn't mean that the shoe stores should start selling shoes individually.



Eh, maybe just a 1/2 off discount


----------



## panfried0419 (Mar 22, 2013)

LEON MANLEY said:


> I guess it went over your head.
> QUOTE]
> 
> ^^^dear God forgive him for he just posted the most ignorant post of the year^^^


----------



## LEON MANLEY (Mar 22, 2013)

panfried0419 said:


> ^^^dear God forgive him for he just posted the most ignorant post of the year^^^



Well coming from you that means a lot.
Of course it might have been a touch more than you could comprehend.

You know if I was gay, your post would be uncalled for and could go so far as to hurt my feelings?


----------



## panfried0419 (Mar 22, 2013)

Actually no it doesnt. I'm just saying your post are bigoted. That's all. Remember that word you used earlier? Context. Study it.


----------



## hobbs27 (Mar 22, 2013)

Luke 18:9-14

9- .And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others:

10.--Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican.

11.The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.

12.I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.

13- -And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.

14- I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.


----------



## Crickett (Mar 22, 2013)

BoneHunter77 said:


> I'm a christian and have found some pretty substantial evidence in the bible (Matthew and Romans) speaking on this subject. My wife and I differ on this topic. She thinks gays are born gay but I disagree. What say you?



I had a cousin that was gay. His daddy & my daddy were brothers. We both grew up in the same religion. Deep southern baptist. Our Papa was a preacher. When my cousin was in his early 20's he was engaged to a woman but they broke up. I'm not sure why b/c I was little when they split but after that he never brought another girl around. He soon started dressing way nicer. He wore very nice mens jewelry. He always had his hair styled real nice. This was during the early 90's. Well one day I realized that he was gay but that didn't change my view on him. He was still my cousin. Well sometime in the late 90's he got VERY sick. He moved back home with his mom & dad & then they told the family why he was sick. He had AIDS. While on his death bed he wrote a letter to the family. I can't really remember all of the details in it. I think my mom still has it. Anyways, in his letter he stated he knew in his heart his lifestyle choice was wrong but he prayed that God would forgive him for his choice he had made. I don't feel that he was born gay but he made the choice to be gay. For whatever reason he couldn't help it but it was his choice.


----------



## gemcgrew (Mar 22, 2013)

Crickett said:


> I had a cousin that was gay. His daddy & my daddy were brothers. We both grew up in the same religion. Deep southern baptist. Our Papa was a preacher. When my cousin was in his early 20's he was engaged to a woman but they broke up. I'm not sure why b/c I was little when they split but after that he never brought another girl around. He soon started dressing way nicer. He wore very nice mens jewelry. He always had his hair styled real nice. This was during the early 90's. Well one day I realized that he was gay but that didn't change my view on him. He was still my cousin. Well sometime in the late 90's he got VERY sick. He moved back home with his mom & dad & then they told the family why he was sick. He had AIDS. While on his death bed he wrote a letter to the family. I can't really remember all of the details in it. I think my mom still has it. Anyways, in his letter he stated he knew in his heart his lifestyle choice was wrong but he prayed that God would forgive him for his choice he had made. I don't feel that he was born gay but he made the choice to be gay. For whatever reason he couldn't help it but it was his choice.



Thank you for sharing that story. Although it may or may not address the "born this way" argument, it does address questions regarding consequences and the "no harm done" argument.


----------



## JB0704 (Mar 23, 2013)

gemcgrew said:


> ..... "born this way" argument, it does address questions regarding consequences and the "no harm done" argument.



There are consequences to reckless living regardless of the manner in which an individual lives recklessly.

I have always said that "the rules" seem to make sense because in general they point us to healthy living.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Mar 23, 2013)

Were there any main health issues related to homosexuality before AIDS that outweighed promiscuous heterosexual health issues? I would say the "rules" had more to do with morals than health.
The reckless behavior in the Gay community was promiscuity. Women are better at telling a man "no" or "stop". Two men together on a first date, who's going to stop the other?


----------



## Lead Poison (Mar 26, 2013)

God's view of homosexuality is clearly outlined in the bible.

He calls homosexuality an abomination and holds those who yield to the perversion accountable. 

So CLEARLY, homosexuality is a CHOICE. 

Fortunately, Jesus has provided a way for people to repent. We must never accept what God considers an abomination to be recognized as being ok. This includes recognizing sinful relationships between homosexuals and calling it marriage.


----------



## JFS (Mar 26, 2013)

JB0704 said:


> There are consequences to reckless living regardless of the manner in which an individual lives recklessly.
> 
> I have always said that "the rules" seem to make sense because in general they point us to healthy living.



I always find it ironic that in these conversations people rarely point out that lesbians have the lowest AIDS rate.   Superior morals?  Divine blessing?


----------



## JB0704 (Mar 26, 2013)

JFS said:


> I always find it ironic that in these conversations people rarely point out that lesbians have the lowest AIDS rate.



I think my point was to the fact that a hetero fella being reckless in certain areas of life is at a great personal risk also.  I hadn't really considered the lesbians......hmmm....


----------



## JFS (Mar 26, 2013)

JB0704 said:


> I think my point was to the fact that a hetero fella being reckless in certain areas of life is at a great personal risk also.  I hadn't really considered the lesbians......hmmm....



JB, don't get me wrong, I think I agree with you.  It's all a function of behavior and biology. 

It's absurd to say or imply AIDS is somehow a function of the morality of being gay.  Otherwise you'd have to conclude that lesbians are more moral than heteros, and that would be quite a quandary for some people.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Mar 26, 2013)

The more I read about Paul the more I realize he is more about following commandments than Christians give him credit for. He quotes the only New Testament commands against Homosexuality.
Here is one section from Romans:
Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
Rom 1:19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them.
Rom 1:20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.
Rom 1:21 For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Rom 1:22 Professing to be wise, they became fools,
Rom 1:23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.
Rom 1:24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them.
Rom 1:25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
Rom 1:26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural,
Rom 1:27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.
Rom 1:28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper,
Rom 1:29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; {they are} gossips,
Rom 1:30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents,
Rom 1:31 without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful;
Rom 1:32 and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them. 

Would it be possible for Non-Pauline Christians to be Homosexuals?


----------



## centerpin fan (Mar 26, 2013)

Artfuldodger said:


> Would it be possible for Non-Pauline Christians to be Homosexuals?



No such thing.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Mar 26, 2013)

It appears we aren't being good role models on marriage either:
Marriage is dead! The twin vises of church and law have relaxed their grip on matrimony. We’ve been liberated from the grim obligation to stay in a poisonous or abusive marriage for the sake of the kids or for appearances. The divorce rate has stayed constant at nearly 50 percent for the last two decades. The ease with which we enter and dissolve unions makes marriage seem like a prime-time spectator sport, whether it’s Britney Spears in Vegas or bimbos chasing after the Bachelor.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Mar 26, 2013)

centerpin fan said:


> No such thing.



There aren't that many but there are a few. I just thought maybe Churches that accept homosexuals would probably be against the commandment laden teachings of Paul. 
I've noticed most Messianic Jews are non-Pauline.

I'm not wanting to get into Gay's not repenting but believing Paul was not an apostle won't keep someone from gaining salvation.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Mar 26, 2013)

Paul's teachings about Yeshua were very different from those of James, Peter, and the others in the Jerusalem group. It is striking that Paul's letters never quote Yeshua, rarely refer to Yeshua's teachings, and never mention Yeshua's life. Paul taught his own version of Yeshua's teachings and created his own rules. The Christian Church throughout the 2,000 years since Yeshua has been formed by Paul's teachings, not the teachings of James, the brother of Yeshua, and, some say, not the teachings of Yeshua himself.

The fact that Paul did not present Yeshua's teachings in his epistles or his own preaching has been acknowledged for centuries. Only the Church, built around Paul, fails to admit that fact. To see what prominent theologians, authors, and other great thinkers have said about Paul, click here. 
http://30ce.com/paulinechristianity.htm


----------



## centerpin fan (Mar 26, 2013)

Artfuldodger said:


> Paul's teachings about Yeshua were very different from those of James, Peter, and the others in the Jerusalem group. It is striking that Paul's letters never quote Yeshua, rarely refer to Yeshua's teachings, and never mention Yeshua's life. Paul taught his own version of Yeshua's teachings and created his own rules. The Christian Church throughout the 2,000 years since Yeshua has been formed by Paul's teachings, not the teachings of James, the brother of Yeshua, and, some say, not the teachings of Yeshua himself.
> 
> The fact that Paul did not present Yeshua's teachings in his epistles or his own preaching has been acknowledged for centuries. Only the Church, built around Paul, fails to admit that fact. To see what prominent theologians, authors, and other great thinkers have said about Paul, click here.
> http://30ce.com/paulinechristianity.htm



From the same website:

_"The central difference between Yeshua's teaching and Paul's church was in justification by faith."_

I think that would be a shock to most Christians.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Mar 26, 2013)

centerpin fan said:


> From the same website:
> 
> _"The central difference between Yeshua's teaching and Paul's church was in justification by faith."_
> 
> I think that would be a shock to most Christians.



Most definitely, I've been reading about Paul lately. That website is very liberal in it's beliefs.
I am not affiliated nor follow there teachings. I don't believe a belief in Paul is a requirement for Salvation.


----------



## JB0704 (Mar 27, 2013)

JFS said:


> JB, don't get me wrong, I think I agree with you.  It's all a function of behavior and biology.



Yes, we are in agreement there. 



JFS said:


> It's absurd to say or imply AIDS is somehow a function of the morality of being gay.  Otherwise you'd have to conclude that lesbians are more moral than heteros, and that would be quite a quandary for some people.



Before your original post on that topic, I had never thought about the lesbians.  I don't think aids is God's punishment on gays, it is an STD which is transmitted through reckless behavior (not just reckless sexual behavior) and is not limited to the gay community.  If anything, it is a deterrent to making certain poor decisions regardless of one's orientation.


----------



## Ronnie T (Mar 27, 2013)

It occurred to me last night that there's something that must be considered and remembered.

Biblically speaking, a homosexual is never a homosexual until that person has intimate relations with another person of the same sex.
And at that point the person might ask God for forgiveness and the strength to never do it again.

No one is a homosexual merely because you believe they "act" or "carry" themselves like a homosexual.  It is the "act".

I personally welcome any person into my church family.
.


----------



## hobbs27 (Mar 27, 2013)

Ronnie T said:


> I personally welcome any person into my church family.
> .



As minister would you have any problem with marrying a homosexual couple?


----------



## Ronnie T (Mar 27, 2013)

hobbs27 said:


> As minister would you have any problem with marrying a homosexual couple?



I would never perform a ceremony for two people of the same sex.  I would humbly explain and show them why I could not.  And I'd offer to continue studying with them and helping them, if they were interested.


----------



## hobbs27 (Mar 27, 2013)

Ronnie T said:


> I would never perform a ceremony for two people of the same sex.  I would humbly explain and show them why I could not.  And I'd offer to continue studying with them and helping them, if they were interested.



I appreciate your answer.I suspect most of Gods called men would respond the same.It was on my mind when I read your other response, not because I wondered about your moral standing in specific, but it was being debated on a radio show I was listening to.
 There's alot of things that hasn't really been thought out by those screaming for equal marriage, such as if marriage is declared a right, could a church be threatened by the feds to lose tax exempt status for refusing to marry gays?Could a minister be charged for denying civil rights?It gets real messy when we start tearing out the fiber of our nation.
 Our founding fathers proclaimed we have rights that are given us by our creator...I wonder if the SC Justices will consider the question if God gave us a right to commit an abomination unto God( One that our Gov't would protect.)
The more I ponder on this the more complicated it becomes.


----------



## drippin' rock (Mar 27, 2013)

Some people turn to members of their own sex because of mental trauma or molestation.  I think most gays are born that way however.  It is a genetic mutation like a vestigial tail or six fingers on one hand.  

Artfulldodger asked and nobody answered.  What about people born with both sexes?  Are they not created by God?  If so, what is his purpose?  Where do they fit in?  Who are they going to be with? They most definitely did not choose their body parts. 

And for those of you that ask why doctors can't tell from birth if someone is gay,  we are in the infancy of our understanding of this universe and everything in it.  We just mapped the human genome. So chances are we WILL be able to tell in the future.  Heck, we will probably be able to genetically engineer that trait out of someone.

Mutations have been around since we have been on this planet.  They can be seen in all walks of life.  If God created the universe, then he is responsible for all its adaptations and mutations.   But hey.  Maybe we can have a laying on of hands and just pray the gay out.


----------



## Ronnie T (Mar 27, 2013)

hobbs27 said:


> I appreciate your answer.I suspect most of Gods called men would respond the same.It was on my mind when I read your other response, not because I wondered about your moral standing in specific, but it was being debated on a radio show I was listening to.
> There's alot of things that hasn't really been thought out by those screaming for equal marriage, such as if marriage is declared a right, could a church be threatened by the feds to lose tax exempt status for refusing to marry gays?Could a minister be charged for denying civil rights?It gets real messy when we start tearing out the fiber of our nation.
> Our founding fathers proclaimed we have rights that are given us by our creator...I wonder if the SC Justices will consider the question if God gave us a right to commit an abomination unto God( One that our Gov't would protect.)
> The more I ponder on this the more complicated it becomes.



You're right.  This could get messy.
Christians, and the Lord's church need to be careful not to carry their judgmental attitudes to far.
We need to be loving and caring.  Encouraging and strengthening to all who come our way.  But God's will has to be taught and respected.

As you say, it's complicated today.


----------



## Ronnie T (Mar 27, 2013)

drippin' rock said:


> Some people turn to members of their own sex because of mental trauma or molestation.  I think most gays are born that way however.  It is a genetic mutation like a vestigial tail or six fingers on one hand.
> 
> Artfulldodger asked and nobody answered.  What about people born with both sexes?  Are they not created by God?  If so, what is his purpose?  Where do they fit in?  Who are they going to be with? They most definitely did not choose their body parts.
> 
> ...



I think that's a very good point.
Things are not always as they seem.


----------



## gemcgrew (Mar 28, 2013)

drippin' rock said:


> Artfulldodger asked and nobody answered.  What about people born with both sexes?  Are they not created by God?  If so, what is his purpose?  Where do they fit in?  Who are they going to be with? They most definitely did not choose their body parts.


Here are Scripture that come to mind:

"And the LORD said unto him, Who hath made man's mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the LORD?"(Exodus 4:11)

"And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth. And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind? Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him."(John 9:1-3)

"Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?"(Romans 9:20)

I would say that the hermaphrodite, if Christian, will seek God's guidance in their life. They will desire to be used by God for his glory. The non Christian will not.


----------



## Rich Kaminski (Mar 28, 2013)

Has anyone done chromosome research on gays and straight people to determine if gay men have more female horomones than normal or if gay females have more male hormones than normal? That might clarify things on this subject...


----------



## Artfuldodger (Mar 28, 2013)

gemcgrew said:


> Here are Scripture that come to mind:
> 
> "And the LORD said unto him, Who hath made man's mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the LORD?"(Exodus 4:11)
> 
> ...



Those verses make it appear God made them homosexual and all they can do is pray to God to be used as he see's fit. That the Potter made our mental and physical traits.


----------



## hobbs27 (Mar 28, 2013)

Artfuldodger said:


> Those verses make it appear God made them homosexual and all they can do is pray to God to be used as he see's fit. That the Potter made our mental and physical traits.



Didn't God make us all with a sinful nature?I believe we all have something to overcome, be it lust, addictions, or pride.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Mar 28, 2013)

hobbs27 said:


> Didn't God make us all with a sinful nature?I believe we all have something to overcome, be it lust, addictions, or pride.



I thought we inherited our sinful nature from Adam. I would agree with your last sentence  in that we all do have certain sins that are harder to overcome than others.

Man was not created sinful by nature. God created man entirely holy and sinless. Our sinful condition is not the result of God’s creative work, but is a historical consequence of our abuse of free will. To say that God should have created us "for the most part holy and not sinful" fails to do justice to the true freedom and consequences of free will.
http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/how-could-a-perfect-god-create-man-who-is-by-nature-sinful


----------



## gemcgrew (Mar 28, 2013)

Artfuldodger said:


> Our sinful condition is not the result of God’s creative work, but is a historical consequence of our abuse of free will.


Even if this was true, it would be "the result of God's creative work".


----------



## StriperAddict (Mar 28, 2013)

hobbs27 said:


> I appreciate your answer.I suspect most of Gods called men would respond the same.It was on my mind when I read your other response, not because I wondered about your moral standing in specific, but it was being debated on a radio show I was listening to.
> There's alot of things that hasn't really been thought out by those screaming for equal marriage, such as if marriage is declared a right, could a church be threatened by the feds to lose tax exempt status for refusing to marry gays?Could a minister be charged for denying civil rights?It gets real messy when we start tearing out the fiber of our nation.
> Our founding fathers proclaimed we have rights that are given us by our creator...I wonder if the SC Justices will consider the question if God gave us a right to commit an abomination unto God( One that our Gov't would protect.)
> The more I ponder on this the more complicated it becomes.


 
On the point as to what the SC could do...  yes, things will get messy in terms of clergy being forced out of their tax exempt status should they choose to follow scripture.  
As we get closer to the end (as I understand scripture, not to banter about end times per se ), I am certain that the church will be under the gun and forced to bow to secular mandates. I applaud those in the body of Christ who have not, nor will ever cave to ungodly laws such as this.


----------



## jmh5397 (Mar 30, 2013)

Saying that one is born either homosexual or heterosexual is insinuating that the baby is born sexually active.  Babies are born asexual and remain that way until they "choose" to have sex with either a member of the opposite sex or a member of the same sex.  To be "born" homosexual means that you have a genetic disposition to being homosexual, which would imply that God "made" you that way in the womb.  Since we know that God is a loving God, why would He choose to create someone that would be forever removed from Him? We ALL are "born" sinners, that's why we must be born again in Christ.  If you are homosexual, and of age and sound mind, and continue to live that lifestyle.....then you, my friend, "choose" to sin against God.  As far as the scripture concerning eunuchs... I cannot find any evidence that even remotely implies that the eunuchs were homosexual.  Eunuch meant that a man was either born without testes (the reproductive part of our anatomy), castrated so he could be trusted to stay with a harem, or a man that "chose" to be celibate.  Not sure where the homosexual implication comes from.  Happy Easter!  He is risen!


----------

