It's amazing how so many people have watched your first video, but so few the second. You did nothing more than set the stage for what you wanted to say, yet people dislike it because they know you disagree with them. They won't even watch the conclusion since they realize you disagree with their view.
There will come a day when everyone will have to answer for the things they have done in their body, whether it be good or evil. There's more hatred towards those who are reaching out and trying to help those who are fallen victim to homosexuality than those who are homosexual. The Bible is clear. You can twist it, change it or ignore it all you want, but the fact is, you've been given the truth out of love and concern from this man.
One of the major points of the documentary is that the Bible should not be taken literally. Do you kill Sabbath violators and eat only "clean" animals (keep kosher)? If you don't then you are not following the Bible as it was written either.
If you are talking about the God of the Bible then your sexual conduct is condemned. That is what I have demonstrated in my response to the documentary "For the Bible tells me so". No one has answered it because no one can. How you, me or anyone else "feels" is irrelevant when it comes to wha the Bible teaches.
@ARationalResponse If you have truly constructed a question that cannot be answered, you have claimed a power beyond human reach. The ability to create such a question places you on a level of godhood. Since this is impossible, such a claim is blasphemous. Plenty of people have chosen to not engage you not because the questions you raise are unanswerable, but because you have the appearance of one who cares very little about the Bible and more about how you may look as a defender of...
Please try to read more carefully. I gave you the answer to the question in my last post. That answer is “YES”; with propositions it would be “true” for each one. Those of that documentary that I responded to cannot answer; would not answer; because it puts them in a dilemma. It makes them look foolish. If they had more integrity they would have answered like I did and then recanted the position that they hold because it is false.
@ARationalResponse this text. You have chosen to view this silence on the part of those who you have raised your questions to in the way that will best help your image. Your site lists several correspondences with men who hold degrees with some connection to biblical studies, let you provide no proof that these correspondences are not of your own invention, or that your decision to post what you have is not based around the targeting of scholars who hold reputations of responding in ways that...
Is that truly the best you have? I’m inventing emails? I assure you that the correspondences are legitimate; as legitimate as ours. As I have said many times; they did not answer because they saw the dilemma/contradiction they would have faced. It’s just that simple. They were smart enough to avoid the trap but not honest enough to admit that their position is false. I suggest YOU pick the “scholars” who you think are willing to answer. I WILL engage them.
@ARationalResponse may allow you to look better by comparison. Every question has an answer, my friend, for without such, the principle which serves as foundation for the relationship between question and answer would be underminded, in turn terminating this basic concept.
I agree that every question has an answer. That does not mean that we know or can know the answer. In this instance that is not the case. As I said above, the answer is “yes”, to the question- Does Bible condemning consensual same-sex sexual relations?
not doing too well in the ratings are we? Squeeze gay people right in there with the murderers rapists the bank robbers and the pedophiles. Not going to get into arguments about it -there's no point of debating with a bible literalist.I will say that I find that this particular flavour of christian leaves a particularly nasty taste in my mouth.We don't stone people for adultery or for trimming their hedge on the sabbath so why are we clinging on to this one? -It resonates with our own bigotry
Since when did truth become a matter of "counting noses"? What's a "bible literalist"? Stoning for adultery, etc. was under the Old Covenant. If you would listen more carefully you would have learned we are not under the Old Covenant but rather the New.
Love is NOT the issue, sexual conduct is. I have demonstrated that consensual sexual relations between two people of the SAME or OPPOSITE gender is immoral outside of marriage. That is not "tradition" it is Bible teaching. The video I responsed to was entitled "For the Bible Tells Me So".
@ARationalResponse You suggest in your response to this user's post that they should try a 'rational response'. Yet can this response of yours be itself deemed 'rational'? Granted, it is natural for one to defend themselves when found under attack, but the difference to be had between 'natural' and 'rational' is quite great. Your response seems to employ a degree of rational thinking that only saves it from existing on the same level as ULTRAMAGGOT666's post by a margin...
@ARationalResponse "No tolerance? Look who's talking." Your choice of words resembles impulsive finger pointing rather than a response of rational persuasion. Are there not other ways in which you might have better responded? Ways that would not have damaged the credibility of how committed to rationality in this matter you truly are? For instance, something along the lines of "The last words of your post, while colorful, are of a kind with which I shall not engage. As for the statistics you...
@ARationalResponse ...cite, I find that I must respond in this way..." This, at the very least, would have demonstrated a commitment to dealing with facts while at the same time rising above engagement on the level of cheap, petty remarks. Or, better yet, why not respond in a fashion similiar to that with which you have responded to others who have made such remarks against you, declaring that their comment has either little or no substance and thus not worth your time. Or, why even bother?...
@ARationalResponse ...That is, with comments of this variety? Why even dignify the writings of such users in the fist place, and if you must, why not with word choice and tone that rings of controlled rationality rather than that of one who seems to want to respond in a fashion similiar to that used by those who have been attacking you? A danger lies in beginning strong and slowly succumbing to the same tactics of your opponents which you demonstrate as being above...
@ARationalResponse It bears the appearance of one who is losing sight of careful word choice to reflect rational responses, which can be dangerous for your cause.
Most who have attempted to "answer" what I have presented have done so by trying talk about everything except the issue I dealt with in responding to the documentary "For the Bible tells me so". The issue and question has been- Does the Bible condemn consensual"same-sex" sexual relations? The answer to that question is YES. No one can overturn that. All the anger & personal attacks cannot change that. (I'm speaking mostly of others who have responded not necessarily you).
Hate? You don't know the meaning of the word. Try growing up a minority of any kind. You have presented evidence? Formal or just bible opinion? The evidence was presented first...the video you responded to that you have not adequately addressed.
Pay attention. The video I responded to attempted to use the BIBLE to support their homosexual position; remember “For the BIBLE Tells Me So”? I have demonstrated by three basic propositions/questions that that position is FALSE. The BIBLE has been the focus and perimeters of this whole discussion. Implied in that is a belief that the Bible is God’s word, authoritative, understandable, etc. If you want to discuss another issue start a site & I’ll participate if able.
@ARationalResponse Even when using the "Bible" as your authority on the matter, it is clear that there are statements in there against homosexuality. The point of "For the Bible tells me so" is not a validation of the bible but an indication that the Bible is what is really behind the so called refutation of science. But in any case, there are mentions in the Bible that cancel prohibitions in the Old Testament. Consider eating pork or shrimp for example. What did Jesus say about all this?
Again my propositions/questions dealt with the NEW Covenant, not the Old. If you listened more carefully you would have heard that. Old Covenant dietary laws have NO bearing on what the New Covenant teaches. Given your admission that “there are statements in there (the Bible) against homosexuality” what more is there to discuss? Those of the “For the Bible tells me so” video refused to answer because they could not without allowing ALL sexual relations between consenting people.
@ARationalResponse I used the " quotes " on Bible to use your interpretation. That is by no means absolutely certain as either archeology or God's Truth. You can pretty much get away with twisting what you want. There are also hints of acceptance too in the New Covenant. All the stuff that is there and rational is in the Old Testament. But lying with a man "as with" a woman can be taken a LOT of different ways. You may think it's obvious because that's the conclusion you want to jump to.
Be honest enough to answer the propositions/questions I asked. The New Covenant is crystal clear about sexual immorality. “Hints of acceptance”? That is false to the core. NO ONE can answer the propositions/questions I present without contradicting what the New Covenant teaches. The propositions also show that those of the documentary are the ones twisting Bible teaching. If not they could have easily answered them.
@johngagon I defer to other interpretations which your mind is not going to be open to. You've heard of "would jesus discriminate" site already I assume. All I know is this: God doesn't make junk. God makes gay people and makes them gay from birth. This is scientific fact bible or not just like evolution. God does not intend them to love women (which would be false love, a sin), God does not intend them to be celibate either. (would you do it?). You are not gay, who are you to judge.
You seem intent on trying to chase numerous other issues other than the one I responded to from the documentary “For the Bible tells me so”. I’ve already dealt with the pseudo-science. The “gay-gene” is a pipe dream. Evolution is in the same camp. I have contacted “would Jesus discriminate” and they could not deal with propositions/questions anymore that anyone else has.
You equated "our desire for many things" with the desire a person has to love another person. These are not equal. My desire for a new car is not similiar to the desire to love another person - the right to love is necessary for the pursuit of happiness. Furthermore, there is no harm in who someone loves. For these reasons, your take on the morality of this issue has failed. Religion has adapted to many changes, and will adapt to this one.
Why don't you answer the propositions/questions of the second part. LOVE is NOT the issue. SEXUAL CONDUCT is. When you use the term "right to love" you no doubt mean "right to sex". Love (agape) is not about sexual relations, consensual or otherwise. We only have those rights (authority, permission) the Creator extends to us. Sex OUTSIDE of marriage is NOT one of those "rights". If it is please share the biblical information. Thanks.
@ARationalResponse Okay, first of all, this situation you're speaking of where there's love without sex doesn't exist. If you're in love, sexual relations are inevitable.
And second of all, the rights regarding sexual conduct don't come from a higher power. They come from law. Principled, man-made law from either the second or third school, not the first school (there's a reason this one is obsolete).
Anyway, gay sex is legal now, so the Bible can just deal with it.
To say “love without sex doesn’t exist” is not only false it is foolish. Do you love your parents? Siblings? Even if sexual relations occur between two people who “love” each other that alone does not make it right or moral. You had better rethink your second statement. Are you saying that the laws of a society decide whether an act is moral or immoral? Remember “legal” & “moral” are not synonymous. Don’t ignore the questions like “godcreatesgays2” does.
@ARationalResponse No, THAT was foolish. There's a huge difference between family love and love between two unrelated people, and obviously family love doesn't include sex. Love between two unrelated folks, on the other hand, does, so my point stands. On your second question, one could say laws ARE morality. Our laws come from basic moral principles, not the Bible, and are put in place to ensure moral behavior, so they do tell us what's moral. And what do you mean "don't ignore the questions?"
Which word for love (agape, eros, phileo) are you referring to? Does love cease if for some reason two people can longer have sex? From where did the “basic moral principles” come? You did NOT answer my question. I’ll try again- Are you saying that the laws of a society decide whether an act is moral or immoral? Do NOT ignore these questions. I wrote “don’t ignore” because you ignore questions by not answering them.
@ARationalResponse I JUST ANSWERED IT! It's not me ignoring questions, it's you ignoring answers that you don't want to hear. And you never asked wher the basic moral principles come from, but here's the answer you probably won't listen to: they come from a consensus for what we believe to be bad (genocide, rape, and pedophilia, for example) based on rational thought, not religion. And I was obviously talking about more than one type of love in my last statement. Again, you're not listening.
Who is “we”? “Bad”? WHY are these things “bad”? According to whom? Consensus? Consensus of the majority; just in this nation or the world? Or does each nation decide their own? Genocide? The Nazi didn’t agree. What right do you or anyone else have to impose your “value system” or morals on someone else? Rational thought does NOT provide CONTENT. What is the SOURCE of your content?
It's irrelevant whether anyone's interpretation of the Bible tells him that certain innate characteristics like homosexuality (or skin color or the hand you write with) are "acceptable" or not. Why? Because belief in the Bible, written by men & translated & interpreted in various ways over the centuries, is based on faith, not fact. Your personal belief in any one of its passages cannot be forced upon anyone else. In the end, God creates gays & wants them to be homosexual. Why argue with Him?
Upon what basis did you conclude that "God creates gays & wants them to be homosexual"? Is lying, stealing & murder wrong? If so why? Can any of those passages in the Bible "be forced upon anyone else"? Look forward to your answers.
@ARationalResponse, the same way I know that God creates heteros to be str8, blacks to be black, and left-handed people to be lefties. They are hard-wired that way, it's part of their innate, intrinsic being. There's no comparison possible between such innate components and chosen, criminal activity like rape and murder which damage others and are non consensual. People have chosen to use the Bible, or various interpretations of it, to condemn gays, blacks, lefties, women, etc., but God doesn't.
Your contention that homosexuality is “hard-wired” (genetic) is without merit or proof. Do you endorse those of NAMBLA and B4U-ACT? You missed my point & ignored my questions. If your statement in your next to the last post about the Bible was true you yourself could not make a statement about “God creating” or God “wanting them to be homosexual” or anything else the Bible supposed teaches. Those of “For the Bible tells me so” are doing with the Bible what you say I can’t do.
If you can’t discuss this issue rationally and present evidence for the statements you make don’t expect to be given any serious attention here. If you are not going to answer the questions asked then you will not be given any more time or space by me. The questions are for the purpose of showing how lame your position is. It is far from a “stupid” question so be honest enough to ANSWER it or things end here.
@ARationalResponse, it's irrational &intellectually dishonest to try comparing consensual, life-enriching relationships between adults with raping children, who are neither physically nor emotionally ready to enter into sexual activity, and CANNOT GIVE CONSENT. It's like asking a proponent of interracial marriage, "So, if you think blacks should be allowed to marry whites, do you endorse NAMBLA?" The vast majority of pedophiles target opposite-sex children. Should str8 relationships be banned?
Can a married man engage in a “consensual, life-enriching relationship with another person not his wife? Again you miss the point. You contended “hard-wired”. That’s why I asked about those of NAMBLA and B4U-ACT? Are their sexual desires & conduct moral or immoral? The Bible doesn’t endorse NAMBLA; but neither does it endorse consensual sexual relationships between ANYONE, str8 or “gay”, outside of marriage. To your last question- “No”. Now let’s see if you can answer questions.
@ARationalResponse, again, you're trying to compare apples to oranges. A married man cheating on his wife is doing great harm to his spouse. Does she know about and fully consent to his cheating? Does it make her happy? People driven by pedophilia, bestiality, necrophilia, etc., are NOT engaging in consensual adult activity. They, like the married adulterer are actively HURTING OTHERS. This is completely different than two gay or str8 adults who are committed to loving and supporting each other.
Upon what basis do you or anyone else maintain that “happiness” or “consensual” or “hurting others” is the criterion for something being moral or immoral? You wouldn’t impose your “value system” on someone else would you? Given your position if the wife doesn’t know it then it would be ok. Happy for whom? Does it make “her happy”? What about his happiness; or the other person he’s with?
@ARationalResponse demands, "Upon what basis do you or anyone else maintain that “happiness” or “consensual” or “hurting others” is the criterion for something being moral or immoral?"
Do you really need an explanation as to why consensual relationships are good, and hurting others is bad?
Yes. Tell me “why”. Give me your basis for making and imposing such a criterion. People are doing things every day that “violates” your standard without one bit of a guilty conscience. The relationship between a married man and a prostitute is consensual. Is it good for them if kept only between them? The list for both scenarios could go on & on.
@ARationalResponse, it appears that you are willfully misunderstanding or ignoring the point. A married man having consensual sex with a prostitute--or anyone--is wrong because it affects a NON-CONSENTING third person: the man's wife. It doesn't matter if she immediately knows or not, since her husband is both breaking his vows to her and leaving her open to potential disease, without her even knowing she's at risk. Two gay people loving each other is completely different.
Talk about “misunderstanding” or “ignoring the point”. “Breaking his vows”? “Leaving her open to disease”? Etc. You continue to “argue” that something is WRONG yet have NO basis for doing so. The New Covenant condemns each, but it ALSO condemns sexual immorality, INCLUDING same-sex sexual relations! You cannot have it BOTH ways. You continue to ignore my questions. See 2 previous posts. Here’s another- If his wife consents would it be moral to visit a prostitute?
@ARationalResponse, I'm offering you a valid, rational, real-world reply, which you refuse to, or can't, accept because you're more interested in furthering your agenda than accepting the truth. If your spouse breaks his vows, lies to you, and leaves you vulnerable to disease, you'd be hurt, regardless of what religious lifestyle you choose. Do you really need a book to tell you such behavior is wrong? But two loving, faithful people, gay or str8, being together, hurts no one.
You did NOT answer my questions. Answer the questions asked or you will be given no more space here. Will a lie hurt his wife if she does not know about it? I answer “Yes” to your question. For the LAST time- WHY are the things you mention about spouses wrong? “Hurts no one”? Say who? God declares that it DOES hurt the parties involved. It’s called sin.
"WHY are the things you mention about spouses wrong?"
Lying, cheating, and leaving your spouse open to disease are wrong because they are dishonest, deceitful, and dangerous. I don't need a book to explain that to me. Do you?
"God declares that (loving, monogamous gay relationships) DOES hurt the parties involved. It’s called sin."
Nope, he never has "declared" any such thing. Even in the man-written Bible, loving same-sex relationships are not condemned. Love is not sin.
You do not pay attention. I asked WHY and I ask it again. “Lying is wrong because it’s dishonest”? That’s like saying “Lying is wrong because it’s lying”. How you can maintain that the Bible does not condemn same-sex sexual relations? If that is the case you should have answered the propositions/questions I asked. No one has yet dealt with them.
@ARationalResponse, you seem not have the ability to comprehend the written word. I said that lying is wrong because it results in the other person not knowing the truth, and therefore, being unable to choose what is best for his/her own life based on the facts rather than manipulation and misinformation. Perhaps the man-written Bible has been interpreted to condemn gays (and blacks, women, etc), but so what? God doesn't, and that's what counts.
If the one lying is doing so to choose what is best for his/her life then that’s what is best for them and their happiness. Without appealing to a Higher law your approach is simply subjective & can be accepted or rejected by anyone. Again I ask- IF his wife consents would it be moral to visit a prostitute? I wrote that God (the Bible) condemns consensual same-sex sexual relations; not “gays”. How do you know what God does or does not condemn?
@ARationalResponse writes, "Given your position if the wife doesn’t know it then it would be ok."
Of course, that's not even remotely close to what I said. Adultery is wrong because it decimates the marriage, hurts, and lessens the bonds between husband and wife. A consensual two-person relationship, gay or straight, does not. You simply can't make a rational correlation between cheating on your spouse with loving and committing your life to one other person.
Answer- Is it immoral if the wife doesn’t know? You ignored my other questions. I ask AGAIN- Happy for whom? What about his happiness; or the other person he’s with? Who says it has to be a “two-person relationship” or “ONE other person”? Is your “consensual two-person relationship, gay or straight” married or not? The ONLY thing you can appeal to is your own SUBJECTIVE opinion. Anyone can state the opposite and you CANNOT dispute it. You have NO basis for doing so.
@ARationalResponse, you have the right to express your own, subjective-but-unprovable opinion that the Bible has been perfectly translated, but of course, learned scholars on the subject disagree. Not to mention, there's the valid point about the Bible's being completely irrelevant to those who don't believe in it anyway. Your subjective "religious" opinions cannot be disputed, because they are based on blind faith, but the facts are empirical and cannot be denied.
Again, my previous post you TOTALLY ignored my questions & points about the language of the Bible and the subject of interpretation. It’s not my opinion; it’s what the Bible teaches. “Perfectly translated”? No, but accurately & sufficiently translated. Because someone does not believe something does not make it irrelevant. Biblical faith is NOT blind; it is based on evidence. Read Hebrews 11:1. You continue to want to chase other issues. Start you own discussion & I’ll join in.
@ARationalResponse, your assertion that what the Bible "teaches" is "perfectly translated" IS merely your opinion. Learned scholars all over the world prove you wrong. That's the point. I didn't decline to answer the question; I just pointed out a truth you choose not to acknowledge. As well, your insistence on introducing totally irrelevant questions about prostitutes and unsuspecting wives belies your inability to refute the valid points I'm making ON TOPIC regarding gays.
I wrote “accurately & sufficiently translated”. I repeat- Can the Bible be properly interpreted? It was written in the common language of the day. Did those of the 1st century understand each other in speech & writing? One should approach interpreting the Bible as they would any other written document. You will NOT apply your interpretive approach to other documents of antiquity or modern times. That’s disingenuous. The same applies to your so-called “learned scholars”.
Biblical scholars work on a "proper" translation, but since even they cannot agree, after decades or even generations of study, the probable, reasonable answer is "no".
"Will a lie hurt his wife if she does not know about it?"
It will hurt the relationship, because the man will distance himself from her, so whether she finds out about an affair or not, an affair ends up causing problems for all concerned.
You did not answer- If his wife consents would it be moral to visit a prostitute? There are many people who lead “double lives” with no guilt of conscience
@ARationalResponse Documents of both antiquity as well as modern times are continuously revisited from perspectives that were not previously tried. Furthermore, each perspective that has already been used as a point from which to analyze a particular text are also constantly revisited, both to see if the theories they have brought about still hold up in the face of new evidence as well to see if these theories might offer more insight should they be taken a step further.
In my response to the video “For the Bible tells me so” there were/are certain fundamental assumptions. God exists; the Bible is God’s revelation to man; it has been properly translated; it can be properly interpreted; etc. These were/are not disputed even by them. The various issues that you & others attempt to raise are ones I am willing to engage in but not here. That is NOT the focus of this discussion. Start your own site; make your arguments and I will engage.
ARR, as well, that the Bible, in all its editions, translations, interpretations & editing, is not universally "clear" on anything. Many Christians, who choose to believe in it, have differing opinions about lots of its passages, translations & interpretations. No one can proclaim that his own, personal understanding of the Bible is the only definitive way to look at it. And he certainly can't use his own interpretations as any sort of argument for people who don't believe in the Bible at all.
You regurgitate the same old assertions against the biblical text. Start your own thread or site and I’ll be glad to engage in such a discussion. That is not the focus or issue here. My videos and the video it is in response to are about what the Bible teaches. Such a discussion even on their part implies certain beliefs about the Bible, including its text & interpretation.
@ARationalResponse, yes, the discussion at hand assumes certain beliefs about the Bible are true, but without any universal agreement or proof, it's pointless to insist so.
I know of nothing that has “universal agreement”? Truth is not a matter of “counting noses”. Can the Bible be properly interpreted? I affirm that it can be. It was written in the common language of the day. Did those of the 1st century understand each other in speech & writing? One should approach interpreting the Bible as they would any other written document. All language, whether written or spoken, is literal unless the context demands otherwise. We're doing that right now.
I grew up in a very religious family. Later in my life,I found out that I was homosexual. I have no attraction to men,and I fell in love with an amazing woman.This woman has saved my life. If not for her,I would have been dead long ago. But of course,according to you,God doesn't want me with this woman. I suppose that means he'd rather I be dead. If God made me gay, he seems to have done it for a reason. The person he sent me was a woman, and who are you to judge that?
It is a blessing to have people who care and help us. I know people who have had “amazing” people help them “save their life” or they “would have been dead long ago”. Is that grounds for sexual relations? No. If you mean by “with this woman”, having a consensual sexual relationship with outside of marriage, then NO He doesn’t want you “with this woman”. It’s not “according to ME”; GOD’S judgment is what matters. Question is- what the Bible teaches?
Neither you nor anyone else is going to deter or intimidate me. If you don't have anything of substance to add to this discussion there is no need to comment. I won't post anymore of your comments unless they deal with the issue.
@ARationalResponse Was the idea not that it was their love that possibly saved her, just as it could for any individual? And I think love tends to bring with it an intimacy that makes the bond, and presumably the nature by which she was saved, much stronger. Just because they're women, it seems unfair that they aren't able to strengthen their bond and help each other and must instead deny themselves such things by forcing themselves apart. Forcing oneself upon someone you don't like seems worse
As I wrote to "touchofgreatness" above, sexual conduct is the issue, not love. The concepts you speak of like "intimacy" and "strengthening their bond" and "help each other" can all be accomplished WITHOUT engaging sexual relations. Sex outside of marriage is sexual immorality. When a Bible believer denies that they find themselves in an impossible position. Those who reject the Bible are in an even greater dilemma.
LITTLECARREY- If you want your recent post displayed take out the objectionable word. If not, no more postings. I dare say that the same hate, venom & ad hominem attacks you direct toward me you have NOT directed toward those of the documentary I responded to. Clearly it’s because I am saying what you don’t want to hear. You did NOT answer the propositions. Your baseless assertions have no place in rational discussion. BTW Islam is either a false religion or it is not. I believe it is.
Do you really think in all God's worries and dealings, that he would care if two human beings love one another? Regardless of gender. To say so, is to say that god is hateful, and I don't think you'd argue that. You're archaic and boring and luckily your kind wont be around for much longer. When you meet god, you'll see how wrong you were/are.
God want us to love all people. However the video response addressed sexual conduct. Do you think God care with whom or what a human being has sexual relations? Why don't you answer the propositions/questions of the second video. If you don't believe the Bible then this video and the one it is in response to is not for you. Go live how you want and when you meet you will see how wrong you are.
@ARationalResponse No, I don't think God cares with whom or what one has a sexual relationship with. If both parties are consenting, and are giving each other love, leading to a more peaceful and fulfilling existence to all, why would he? Now sex with a minor or an animal is different because there is no consent. Now if you think God simply has a rule for whatever arbitrary reason that people of the same gender cannot have sex, you can think that. I think it's ignorance.
What you or I think is irrelevant; what God thinks matters. The only way to know that is by the Bible. Can husbands & wives have sex with someone other than their spouse as long as it is consensual? Are you saying that those of NAMBLA & B4U-ACT are sinning? Who said there has to be consent? What’s your basis for “arbitrary”? Why stop at sexual conduct; what about lying, etc.? Why God commands a certain thing doesn’t erase man’s obligation to obey. Look forward to your answers.
These kind of people are the ones wrong with the world, everyone knows it and see it happen everyday. Its PROPAGANDA created by MEN and their genetically evolved ability to imagine wonderful stories,along with horrible nightmares. Plus their ALWAYS the ones with the most skeletons in their closets, not to mention themselves. I mean the way this guy acts/sounds/looks I see him more of a sexual predator to small children rather than a wanna be soldier of christ. Pathetic ignorance is all it is.
More of the same; attack the questioner instead of answering the questions. If someone was a sexual predator to small children would that be wrong? If so, WHY?
@ARationalResponse I'm not giving u a 'rational response' because people like you have no rational thinking. Anyways Jesus came to me in a dream last night and instructed me to TELL YOU to "Go forth and spend thy social security on bowling, and scratch and win tickets but please STOP MAKING VIDEOS!!!" Remember thats not ME judging you, it's Jesus and I'd watch myself as well, even though he has the voice of, well an angel, he kinda sounded pissed off at you.
You are not giving a rational response because you can't deal with the evidence. Personal attacks are the sign of shallow thinking. Perhaps you should try bowling or buying lottery tickets. You would have a better "chance" at winning the lottery than overturning the case I have presented against sexual immorality, both hetero & homo. By the way, you are judging me, but that's ok all of us make judgments everyday.
@ARationalResponse haha...ok dude.Nothing anyone/anywhere(PHD or not), except maybe ALLAH, can change your views obviously...I guess we'll agree to disagree. But i really do wonder that why a man of your age, has such a pessimistic attitude towards the world, and even more why a man of your age feels it necessary to try "scare" a new generation of youths?(75% of utube users) Wouldn't you have more dignity in death(with or without jesus) in knowing you made people happy in a shit filled world???
My views are based on truth. Are you allergic to listening & logic? College degrees & age are irrelevant. “Pessimistic”? “Scare”? Thanks for the amateur psychological analysis of my motive & world outlook. Not here to discuss the false religion of Islam. Have integrity & answer the propositions of part #2. If you do not believe the Bible then this discussion is not for you. True & lasting happiness is doing God’s will; not living in sin. Anymore foul language & no more postings.
@ARationalResponse Your views are based on your opinion and misrepresentation of the bible, all this video does is make people hate you and god. So far you're doing a very good job!
If your contentions were true you would have shown how I misrepresented the Bible. You and others have spewed your venom and hate because you hate the truth. Have I become your enemy because I tell you the truth (Gal.4:16)? If so...so be it.
The phrase comes to mind, "if you could walk a mile in my shoe...". You have no idea what certain people go through, especially as young teenagers, when they realize they're gay. Based on your neophyte understanding of philosophy, allowing homosexual marriage would not lead to the marriage of 3 people or people marrying pets, etc, due to the slippery slope argument (look it up).
You try not accepting yourself and see just how good that is for your mental health and well being.
Are you saying I need to "walk a mile in the shoes" of all conducts before I can make a moral judgment based on what the Bible teaches? "Look it up"? You are the one asserting something. You need to present the evidence to support it, not tell someone to "look it up".
Start your own discussion somewhere about any or all of those topics and I will be happy to participate. Those are not the topic of my video or that of the documentary "For the Bible Tells Me So".
@ARationalResponse no their not topics on your video, but if your going to blindly follow a book written thousands of years ago literally dont pick and choose wich passages to follow and then consider your self a "good christian" only doing what your religion tells you. just proving a point
In view of the fact that you have not addressed the propositions/questions I asked in part #2 I can see why you would say such a thing. A "proper documentary"? Three propositions and one question was all that was necessary to expose the foolishness of "For the Bible Tells Me So" and all the Dr. of "divinity". Enough said.
The ONLY thing the "Bible" teaches us is how stupid and ignorant people REALLY are......they'll believe anything they see on print. I have no worries I'll burn in "Hell" .....since the Bible is all BS anyways. The only ones living in shame are the ones living a total lie ..."the bible cult"
"pro homosexual"? "bible teachings". I think I automatically smell bias against a certain class of people and for a certain book. I really don't care if the bible does or does not, science has time and time again shown bible opinion to be lacking. So what other evidence is there? I believe God accepts the conduct as well as he accepts straight conduct. It's not a conduct, it's human nature. It's not a sin issue. Which verse are we quoting when you quote "love the sinner, hate the sin?"
Your assertions amount to nothing. If you want to start a discussion somewhere else about the Bible and science, etc. I will glad to participate, but that is not the focus of this video. You state what you "beleve God accepts"; the problem is the Bible does NOT support what you believe. What sexual conduct do you believe is NOT "human nature"?
@ARationalResponse No, The problem is you are a nut who puts a few versus about mensus and gay sex ahead of 99% of the rest of the bible regarding your hypocrisy. You look ridiculous trying to put scholarly robes on a pious raving zealot with personal issues. You're egocentric and selfish which means you can only think of what suites your own kink and taste and to hell with everyone else. Either that or more sadly, you are a closet nut. Waving a bible doesn't make your opinion fact to all.
You spew hate and venom simply because you cannot answer the questions posed. If you want to practice and endorse sexual immorality go ahead but I have the right to oppose and expose it for the sin it is. Those of the video I am responding to believe the Bible though they present a perverted interpretation of it. This is clear from the fact that none of them attempted to answer my propositions/questions. If you do not believe the Bible then this discussion is not for you.
If I had her email address I would send her the propositions/questions. I assure you she would fare no better than anyone else has in answering them while trying to endorse or practice "same-sex" sexual relations. If you know how to contact her listen to part #2 and send the propositions. Let me know how that goes.
Please share an example of stereotyping. This charge is humorous seeing that the documentary that I am replying to is filled with stereotyping. Watch part #2 and answer the propositions/questions mate. Thanks.
I am positive you're old enough to have been learned the expression "two wrongs don't make a right" mate.
In regards to stereotyping:
In the above video, you talk about the hypocrisy of the pie thrown in the face of Anita Bryant, which I agree is a hypocritical action. However, you then say.. and I quote..
"And my friends, quite frankly that is par for the course for a lot of these individuals."
There is nothing of hypocrisy here. It IS par for the course for A LOT of them. That is not an indictment of ALL. The same could be said of those who claim Christianity too.
@ARationalResponse "A LOT" denotes a great degree in terms of numerical values. Let's say there are 7,000,000,000 people in the world. If 1% are homosexuals, it would equate to 70,000,000 people. Now let's say "A LOT" was 1% of those people. (1% is rarely "A LOT" of anything, with a pool of 7b, once can make a case.) You would have had to personally interact with 700,000 homosexuals for your statement to be anything other than a stereotype. Sorry, but you stereotyped, mate.
I’m not going to waste time quibbling over the quantity of homosexuals and their supporters who commit violence to advance their sinful cause. If you think that was stereotyping it was not my intention to do so. Now to more important things; do you agree with the statement by Dr. Laurence Keene of the documentary “For the Bible Tells Me So” that I addressed? If you do, please address the propositions/questions I asked in part #2. Thanks mate.
@ARationalResponse I'm sorry but I've never heard of an incident of homosexuals comiting random acts violence on straight people just for being straight , the oposite how ever i can think of at lest 3 incidences locally right off the top of my head
I am not defending acts of violence against anyone, heterosexual or homosexual. I made that clear in video #1. The issue is "what does the Bible teach". That was the contention of the propaganda piece "For the Bible tells me so". Their contention is false.
A couple of points: Why wouldn’t similarities in moral codes across the globe indicate a common source? I don’t think that the moral code came from religion either. I believe the evidence shows it came from God. Genetics and intelligence (human or animal) does not address the question of “WHAT is right and wrong” or “WHY is it right or wrong”. If I or someone else stated what we believe about a moral code and that belief was the exact opposite of yours, who would be right and why?
I did NOT ask you what you DON'T need to make moral judgments I asked you what your basis or criterion was for making moral judgments. Although this subject is not the focus of my video and the video I responded to (because that video was entitled, "For the BIBLE tells me so") please share your answer.
You will not be posted if you cannot be cordial in your language. Since you labeled me as “evil”; why don’t you try and answer these two questions- What’s evil? How did you decide what is evil?
Have you taken the time to think of the implications when you wrote, "You have NO right to judge others"? Are you judging me for judging? Can we make any moral judgments? If so, what? and why? What might be your basis or criterion for such judgments?
Deal with the propositions/questions. Attacking me will not change what the Bible teaches. Dr. Mel White of Soulforce could NOT answer. Jimmy Creech of "Faith in America" could NOT answer. Dr. Peter Gomez of Harvard Divinity could NOT answer. Neither will you. They all knew the dilemma they would be in if they did. The pie in the face? Do you endorse assulting someone because they disagree with you.
If you listened carefully to both videos then you know I addressed sexual relations. Can you practice fornication/sexual immorality and be a Christian? A man or woman may have a desire for or an orientation toward children or animals. Should they “feed” that or starve it? Should they act upon it or abstain from it? And upon what basis do you say one desire or orientation is acceptable or normal or moral and another not? Since I am ignorant I look forward to your answers.
@ARationalResponse Sharing a relationship with someone you love and share your life with is not fornication. Here's the Definition of fornication. for·ni·ca·tion (fôrn-kshn)
noun. Sexual intercourse between partners who are not married to each other. Well we're denied our right to marry, so we can't help it.
It is God Who has denied two men or two women to marry. As I have asked TruAgape (which he/she has NOT answered)- Besides a man and a woman (Mark 10:6-9; 1 Cor.7:2-4; etc.), give another combination of a marriage the New Covenant authorizes. Does it authorize and endorse the marriage of 2 men or 2 women or 1 man and 3 women; a man & a dog? If so please share the Bible reference. I am confident you will fair no better.
"For the Bible Tells Me So" = worst, most illogical response to logical, rational thought and scientific evidence. also, something an indoctrinated 8 year old would say.
It's NOT about me, my race, my sexual orientation, etc. it's about what the BIBLE teaches. That is the position of the documentary- "For the BIBLE Tells Me So". Of course they are wrong in their position. If you are taking the time to comment on & disagree with my video why would you attack me for taking the time to comment on and disagree with their's? Does this mean we BOTH need to "get a life & keep out of everyone else's business"?
@ARationalResponse As a devout Catholic, I can really understand your position towards this documentary. Believe me, as a homosexual, I'm struggling with this controversial issue. I have not come out to my family, who are also devout Catholics, for I still fear their reaction. That's why I've been immersing myself into research/Bible study about this topic because I want to know what is God's plan for someone like me and please him. I want to do good. Why would he have created me like this?
@ARationalResponse By the way, I'm also studying Psychology. And together with my Bible study/research, as much as I would like to agree with you and what the Catholic/other churches teach, I still feel deep in my heart that homosexuality and other human conditions exist for a purpose. It doesn't make sense to me that can be born with an additional "sin," besides the original. So far, I believe it's really about showing unconditional love . Do you truly believe in it?
@ARationalResponse The old testament cannot be used in today's world, Leviticus was written for the Levitites who were committing acts of rape, against men and boys, they were also worshiping idols and have prostitution in temple. That's what leviticus and sodom was about. For every video you and other people make like this, you cause more people to fall away from god, after all who wants to worship a god who is going to send them to hell for loving another person?
The basis of my argument was the NEW COVENANT not the Old. I would appreciate it if you would please answer the propositions/questions I asked and we will proceed from there. God wants us to love all people. Sexual relations with someone is a different issue.
Thank you so much for answering the questions I asked. It is so refreshing to see such honestly and rationality. The sarcasm aside; PLEASE ANSWER THE QUESTIONS.
@ARationalResponse Please do us a favor, keep what you have to say to yourself, hating is a sin, condemning us is a sin, when I and other gay folks want your opinion we'll come to you. I pray that no one watches this video and goes out and starts killing gays. LOVE IS NOT A SIN. The Bible does not say only HETEROSEXUALS can love.
Will you “keep what you have to say to yourself”? God has revealed that ONLY heterosexuals can marry. It’s amazing you can honestly listen to my first video about what the issues are and are not and then be concerned about someone going out and killing gays. I have never argued that love is a sin. What do you mean by “love”? Is the “love” you speak of platonic or sexual?
@ARationalResponse Well them heaven is going to be very empty because I don't want to be in heaven with people who preach that gays are going to hell. At least in Hell everyone will be with their partners and will be happy. Love is love, it has one meaning. Love has no boundaries and borders, and you cannot twist bible verses to make your point. I forgive you for your ignorance and intolerance but obviously you're just out to condemn people. Don't bother replying you make me sick.
It’s your decision. You will have to live with it. No one will be happy in hell. Love is NOT love. It does NOT all have one meaning. God loves all people. Does that mean He will endorse and condone all conduct? Such is absurd. It is laughable that you tell me not to reply and it’s MY video. Again ridiculous.
If you listen to first video you know I make it clear that this issue will NOT be decided by the majority. Do you really want to take the position that moral issues are decided by the majority? If you want to go down that road let me know. We'll see far you can go before you recant it.
It's amazing how so many people have watched your first video, but so few the second. You did nothing more than set the stage for what you wanted to say, yet people dislike it because they know you disagree with them. They won't even watch the conclusion since they realize you disagree with their view.
vader421138 4 weeks ago
There will come a day when everyone will have to answer for the things they have done in their body, whether it be good or evil. There's more hatred towards those who are reaching out and trying to help those who are fallen victim to homosexuality than those who are homosexual. The Bible is clear. You can twist it, change it or ignore it all you want, but the fact is, you've been given the truth out of love and concern from this man.
mdleidyjr 1 month ago
where are you on eating shrimp?
endlessw 1 month ago
@endlessw
I rather enjoy shrimp and most seafood. I look forward to Red Lobster's all you can eat shrimp. Do you like shrimp too?
ARationalResponse 1 month ago
One of the major points of the documentary is that the Bible should not be taken literally. Do you kill Sabbath violators and eat only "clean" animals (keep kosher)? If you don't then you are not following the Bible as it was written either.
hemiforever 1 month ago 2
@hemiforever
The things you mention were under the Old Covenant. My position is based on the New Covenant. Please pay closer attention.
ARationalResponse 1 month ago
My comments are finished. Please respond promptly.
multismashify 1 month ago
@multismashify
Hope this is prompt enough.
ARationalResponse 1 month ago
@BeauG92
If you are talking about the God of the Bible then your sexual conduct is condemned. That is what I have demonstrated in my response to the documentary "For the Bible tells me so". No one has answered it because no one can. How you, me or anyone else "feels" is irrelevant when it comes to wha the Bible teaches.
ARationalResponse 1 month ago
@ARationalResponse If you have truly constructed a question that cannot be answered, you have claimed a power beyond human reach. The ability to create such a question places you on a level of godhood. Since this is impossible, such a claim is blasphemous. Plenty of people have chosen to not engage you not because the questions you raise are unanswerable, but because you have the appearance of one who cares very little about the Bible and more about how you may look as a defender of...
multismashify 1 month ago
@multismashify
Please try to read more carefully. I gave you the answer to the question in my last post. That answer is “YES”; with propositions it would be “true” for each one. Those of that documentary that I responded to cannot answer; would not answer; because it puts them in a dilemma. It makes them look foolish. If they had more integrity they would have answered like I did and then recanted the position that they hold because it is false.
ARationalResponse 1 month ago
@ARationalResponse this text. You have chosen to view this silence on the part of those who you have raised your questions to in the way that will best help your image. Your site lists several correspondences with men who hold degrees with some connection to biblical studies, let you provide no proof that these correspondences are not of your own invention, or that your decision to post what you have is not based around the targeting of scholars who hold reputations of responding in ways that...
multismashify 1 month ago
@multismashify
Is that truly the best you have? I’m inventing emails? I assure you that the correspondences are legitimate; as legitimate as ours. As I have said many times; they did not answer because they saw the dilemma/contradiction they would have faced. It’s just that simple. They were smart enough to avoid the trap but not honest enough to admit that their position is false. I suggest YOU pick the “scholars” who you think are willing to answer. I WILL engage them.
ARationalResponse 1 month ago
@ARationalResponse may allow you to look better by comparison. Every question has an answer, my friend, for without such, the principle which serves as foundation for the relationship between question and answer would be underminded, in turn terminating this basic concept.
multismashify 1 month ago
@multismashify
I agree that every question has an answer. That does not mean that we know or can know the answer. In this instance that is not the case. As I said above, the answer is “yes”, to the question- Does Bible condemning consensual same-sex sexual relations?
ARationalResponse 1 month ago
not doing too well in the ratings are we? Squeeze gay people right in there with the murderers rapists the bank robbers and the pedophiles. Not going to get into arguments about it -there's no point of debating with a bible literalist.I will say that I find that this particular flavour of christian leaves a particularly nasty taste in my mouth.We don't stone people for adultery or for trimming their hedge on the sabbath so why are we clinging on to this one? -It resonates with our own bigotry
tonyonly2 1 month ago
@tonyonly2
Since when did truth become a matter of "counting noses"? What's a "bible literalist"? Stoning for adultery, etc. was under the Old Covenant. If you would listen more carefully you would have learned we are not under the Old Covenant but rather the New.
ARationalResponse 1 month ago
@BeauG92
Love is NOT the issue, sexual conduct is. I have demonstrated that consensual sexual relations between two people of the SAME or OPPOSITE gender is immoral outside of marriage. That is not "tradition" it is Bible teaching. The video I responsed to was entitled "For the Bible Tells Me So".
ARationalResponse 2 months ago
Homosexuality is found in over 500 different species.
Homophobia is only found in 1.
You're just hopeless white trash crap, go kill yourself. NO TOLERANCE FOR IGNORANCE!!
ULTRAMAGGOT666 2 months ago
@ULTRAMAGGOT666
No tolerance? Look who's talking. Your hate is obvious too. My race is irrelevant. Next time try a rational response. I won't post any more nonsense.
ARationalResponse 2 months ago
@ARationalResponse I never mentioned race. In fact, I shall message you my full response as it is too long to post in a comment.
ULTRAMAGGOT666 2 months ago
@ARationalResponse You suggest in your response to this user's post that they should try a 'rational response'. Yet can this response of yours be itself deemed 'rational'? Granted, it is natural for one to defend themselves when found under attack, but the difference to be had between 'natural' and 'rational' is quite great. Your response seems to employ a degree of rational thinking that only saves it from existing on the same level as ULTRAMAGGOT666's post by a margin...
multismashify 1 month ago
@multismashify
I'll share a short reply at the end of these connected comments.
ARationalResponse 1 month ago
@ARationalResponse "No tolerance? Look who's talking." Your choice of words resembles impulsive finger pointing rather than a response of rational persuasion. Are there not other ways in which you might have better responded? Ways that would not have damaged the credibility of how committed to rationality in this matter you truly are? For instance, something along the lines of "The last words of your post, while colorful, are of a kind with which I shall not engage. As for the statistics you...
multismashify 1 month ago
@multismashify continue to the next
ARationalResponse 1 month ago
@ARationalResponse ...cite, I find that I must respond in this way..." This, at the very least, would have demonstrated a commitment to dealing with facts while at the same time rising above engagement on the level of cheap, petty remarks. Or, better yet, why not respond in a fashion similiar to that with which you have responded to others who have made such remarks against you, declaring that their comment has either little or no substance and thus not worth your time. Or, why even bother?...
multismashify 1 month ago
@multismashify
continue to the next
ARationalResponse 1 month ago
@ARationalResponse ...That is, with comments of this variety? Why even dignify the writings of such users in the fist place, and if you must, why not with word choice and tone that rings of controlled rationality rather than that of one who seems to want to respond in a fashion similiar to that used by those who have been attacking you? A danger lies in beginning strong and slowly succumbing to the same tactics of your opponents which you demonstrate as being above...
multismashify 1 month ago
@multismashify
continue to the next
ARationalResponse 1 month ago
@ARationalResponse It bears the appearance of one who is losing sight of careful word choice to reflect rational responses, which can be dangerous for your cause.
multismashify 1 month ago
@multismashify
Most who have attempted to "answer" what I have presented have done so by trying talk about everything except the issue I dealt with in responding to the documentary "For the Bible tells me so". The issue and question has been- Does the Bible condemn consensual"same-sex" sexual relations? The answer to that question is YES. No one can overturn that. All the anger & personal attacks cannot change that. (I'm speaking mostly of others who have responded not necessarily you).
ARationalResponse 1 month ago
He has lots of books. He must be smart!
th3st1g1 3 months ago
@th3st1g1
If you want to be taken seriously you need to share something of substance to the issue being discussed. Thanks.
ARationalResponse 3 months ago
Hate? You don't know the meaning of the word. Try growing up a minority of any kind. You have presented evidence? Formal or just bible opinion? The evidence was presented first...the video you responded to that you have not adequately addressed.
johngagon 3 months ago
@johngagon
Pay attention. The video I responded to attempted to use the BIBLE to support their homosexual position; remember “For the BIBLE Tells Me So”? I have demonstrated by three basic propositions/questions that that position is FALSE. The BIBLE has been the focus and perimeters of this whole discussion. Implied in that is a belief that the Bible is God’s word, authoritative, understandable, etc. If you want to discuss another issue start a site & I’ll participate if able.
ARationalResponse 3 months ago
@ARationalResponse Even when using the "Bible" as your authority on the matter, it is clear that there are statements in there against homosexuality. The point of "For the Bible tells me so" is not a validation of the bible but an indication that the Bible is what is really behind the so called refutation of science. But in any case, there are mentions in the Bible that cancel prohibitions in the Old Testament. Consider eating pork or shrimp for example. What did Jesus say about all this?
johngagon 3 months ago
@johngagon
Again my propositions/questions dealt with the NEW Covenant, not the Old. If you listened more carefully you would have heard that. Old Covenant dietary laws have NO bearing on what the New Covenant teaches. Given your admission that “there are statements in there (the Bible) against homosexuality” what more is there to discuss? Those of the “For the Bible tells me so” video refused to answer because they could not without allowing ALL sexual relations between consenting people.
ARationalResponse 2 months ago
@ARationalResponse I used the " quotes " on Bible to use your interpretation. That is by no means absolutely certain as either archeology or God's Truth. You can pretty much get away with twisting what you want. There are also hints of acceptance too in the New Covenant. All the stuff that is there and rational is in the Old Testament. But lying with a man "as with" a woman can be taken a LOT of different ways. You may think it's obvious because that's the conclusion you want to jump to.
johngagon 2 months ago
@johngagon
Be honest enough to answer the propositions/questions I asked. The New Covenant is crystal clear about sexual immorality. “Hints of acceptance”? That is false to the core. NO ONE can answer the propositions/questions I present without contradicting what the New Covenant teaches. The propositions also show that those of the documentary are the ones twisting Bible teaching. If not they could have easily answered them.
ARationalResponse 2 months ago
@johngagon I defer to other interpretations which your mind is not going to be open to. You've heard of "would jesus discriminate" site already I assume. All I know is this: God doesn't make junk. God makes gay people and makes them gay from birth. This is scientific fact bible or not just like evolution. God does not intend them to love women (which would be false love, a sin), God does not intend them to be celibate either. (would you do it?). You are not gay, who are you to judge.
johngagon 2 months ago
@johngagon
You seem intent on trying to chase numerous other issues other than the one I responded to from the documentary “For the Bible tells me so”. I’ve already dealt with the pseudo-science. The “gay-gene” is a pipe dream. Evolution is in the same camp. I have contacted “would Jesus discriminate” and they could not deal with propositions/questions anymore that anyone else has.
ARationalResponse 2 months ago
Well, if you're looking for kudos, go find your homophobic friends at church, not the general public.
johngagon 3 months ago
@johngagon
Your words reek of hate. Kudos? Truth is not a matter of “kudos” or a “counting of noses” but rather evidence. I have presented mine. Where is yours?
ARationalResponse 3 months ago
You equated "our desire for many things" with the desire a person has to love another person. These are not equal. My desire for a new car is not similiar to the desire to love another person - the right to love is necessary for the pursuit of happiness. Furthermore, there is no harm in who someone loves. For these reasons, your take on the morality of this issue has failed. Religion has adapted to many changes, and will adapt to this one.
TouchOfGreatness 3 months ago
@TouchOfGreatness
Why don't you answer the propositions/questions of the second part. LOVE is NOT the issue. SEXUAL CONDUCT is. When you use the term "right to love" you no doubt mean "right to sex". Love (agape) is not about sexual relations, consensual or otherwise. We only have those rights (authority, permission) the Creator extends to us. Sex OUTSIDE of marriage is NOT one of those "rights". If it is please share the biblical information. Thanks.
ARationalResponse 3 months ago
@ARationalResponse Okay, first of all, this situation you're speaking of where there's love without sex doesn't exist. If you're in love, sexual relations are inevitable.
And second of all, the rights regarding sexual conduct don't come from a higher power. They come from law. Principled, man-made law from either the second or third school, not the first school (there's a reason this one is obsolete).
Anyway, gay sex is legal now, so the Bible can just deal with it.
TheObservantOne1 3 months ago
@TheObservantOne1
To say “love without sex doesn’t exist” is not only false it is foolish. Do you love your parents? Siblings? Even if sexual relations occur between two people who “love” each other that alone does not make it right or moral. You had better rethink your second statement. Are you saying that the laws of a society decide whether an act is moral or immoral? Remember “legal” & “moral” are not synonymous. Don’t ignore the questions like “godcreatesgays2” does.
ARationalResponse 3 months ago
@ARationalResponse No, THAT was foolish. There's a huge difference between family love and love between two unrelated people, and obviously family love doesn't include sex. Love between two unrelated folks, on the other hand, does, so my point stands. On your second question, one could say laws ARE morality. Our laws come from basic moral principles, not the Bible, and are put in place to ensure moral behavior, so they do tell us what's moral. And what do you mean "don't ignore the questions?"
TheObservantOne1 3 months ago
@TheObservantOne1
Which word for love (agape, eros, phileo) are you referring to? Does love cease if for some reason two people can longer have sex? From where did the “basic moral principles” come? You did NOT answer my question. I’ll try again- Are you saying that the laws of a society decide whether an act is moral or immoral? Do NOT ignore these questions. I wrote “don’t ignore” because you ignore questions by not answering them.
ARationalResponse 3 months ago
@ARationalResponse I JUST ANSWERED IT! It's not me ignoring questions, it's you ignoring answers that you don't want to hear. And you never asked wher the basic moral principles come from, but here's the answer you probably won't listen to: they come from a consensus for what we believe to be bad (genocide, rape, and pedophilia, for example) based on rational thought, not religion. And I was obviously talking about more than one type of love in my last statement. Again, you're not listening.
TheObservantOne1 3 months ago
@TheObservantOne1
Who is “we”? “Bad”? WHY are these things “bad”? According to whom? Consensus? Consensus of the majority; just in this nation or the world? Or does each nation decide their own? Genocide? The Nazi didn’t agree. What right do you or anyone else have to impose your “value system” or morals on someone else? Rational thought does NOT provide CONTENT. What is the SOURCE of your content?
ARationalResponse 3 months ago
It's irrelevant whether anyone's interpretation of the Bible tells him that certain innate characteristics like homosexuality (or skin color or the hand you write with) are "acceptable" or not. Why? Because belief in the Bible, written by men & translated & interpreted in various ways over the centuries, is based on faith, not fact. Your personal belief in any one of its passages cannot be forced upon anyone else. In the end, God creates gays & wants them to be homosexual. Why argue with Him?
GodCreatesGays2 3 months ago
@GodCreatesGays2
Upon what basis did you conclude that "God creates gays & wants them to be homosexual"? Is lying, stealing & murder wrong? If so why? Can any of those passages in the Bible "be forced upon anyone else"? Look forward to your answers.
ARationalResponse 3 months ago
@ARationalResponse, the same way I know that God creates heteros to be str8, blacks to be black, and left-handed people to be lefties. They are hard-wired that way, it's part of their innate, intrinsic being. There's no comparison possible between such innate components and chosen, criminal activity like rape and murder which damage others and are non consensual. People have chosen to use the Bible, or various interpretations of it, to condemn gays, blacks, lefties, women, etc., but God doesn't.
GodCreatesGays2 3 months ago
@GodCreatesGays2
Your contention that homosexuality is “hard-wired” (genetic) is without merit or proof. Do you endorse those of NAMBLA and B4U-ACT? You missed my point & ignored my questions. If your statement in your next to the last post about the Bible was true you yourself could not make a statement about “God creating” or God “wanting them to be homosexual” or anything else the Bible supposed teaches. Those of “For the Bible tells me so” are doing with the Bible what you say I can’t do.
ARationalResponse 3 months ago
@RR whimpers, "Your contention that homosexuality is “hard-wired” (genetic) is without merit or proof."
Reality proves you wrong, I'm afraid. And so does the Lord, via His creations. But you are free to live within the confines of your own imagination.
"Do you endorse those of NAMBLA and B4U-ACT?"
A jaw-droppingly stupid question, that, and we both know why. If you need to troll, don't make yourself so obvious.
GodCreatesGays2 3 months ago
@GodCreatesGays2
If you can’t discuss this issue rationally and present evidence for the statements you make don’t expect to be given any serious attention here. If you are not going to answer the questions asked then you will not be given any more time or space by me. The questions are for the purpose of showing how lame your position is. It is far from a “stupid” question so be honest enough to ANSWER it or things end here.
ARationalResponse 3 months ago
@ARationalResponse, it's irrational &intellectually dishonest to try comparing consensual, life-enriching relationships between adults with raping children, who are neither physically nor emotionally ready to enter into sexual activity, and CANNOT GIVE CONSENT. It's like asking a proponent of interracial marriage, "So, if you think blacks should be allowed to marry whites, do you endorse NAMBLA?" The vast majority of pedophiles target opposite-sex children. Should str8 relationships be banned?
GodCreatesGays2 3 months ago
@GodCreatesGays
Can a married man engage in a “consensual, life-enriching relationship with another person not his wife? Again you miss the point. You contended “hard-wired”. That’s why I asked about those of NAMBLA and B4U-ACT? Are their sexual desires & conduct moral or immoral? The Bible doesn’t endorse NAMBLA; but neither does it endorse consensual sexual relationships between ANYONE, str8 or “gay”, outside of marriage. To your last question- “No”. Now let’s see if you can answer questions.
ARationalResponse 3 months ago
@ARationalResponse, again, you're trying to compare apples to oranges. A married man cheating on his wife is doing great harm to his spouse. Does she know about and fully consent to his cheating? Does it make her happy? People driven by pedophilia, bestiality, necrophilia, etc., are NOT engaging in consensual adult activity. They, like the married adulterer are actively HURTING OTHERS. This is completely different than two gay or str8 adults who are committed to loving and supporting each other.
GodCreatesGays2 3 months ago
@GodCreatesGays2
Upon what basis do you or anyone else maintain that “happiness” or “consensual” or “hurting others” is the criterion for something being moral or immoral? You wouldn’t impose your “value system” on someone else would you? Given your position if the wife doesn’t know it then it would be ok. Happy for whom? Does it make “her happy”? What about his happiness; or the other person he’s with?
ARationalResponse 3 months ago
@ARationalResponse demands, "Upon what basis do you or anyone else maintain that “happiness” or “consensual” or “hurting others” is the criterion for something being moral or immoral?"
Do you really need an explanation as to why consensual relationships are good, and hurting others is bad?
GodCreatesGays2 3 months ago
@GodCreatesGays2
Yes. Tell me “why”. Give me your basis for making and imposing such a criterion. People are doing things every day that “violates” your standard without one bit of a guilty conscience. The relationship between a married man and a prostitute is consensual. Is it good for them if kept only between them? The list for both scenarios could go on & on.
ARationalResponse 2 months ago
@ARationalResponse, it appears that you are willfully misunderstanding or ignoring the point. A married man having consensual sex with a prostitute--or anyone--is wrong because it affects a NON-CONSENTING third person: the man's wife. It doesn't matter if she immediately knows or not, since her husband is both breaking his vows to her and leaving her open to potential disease, without her even knowing she's at risk. Two gay people loving each other is completely different.
GodCreatesGays2 2 months ago
@GodCreatesGays2
Talk about “misunderstanding” or “ignoring the point”. “Breaking his vows”? “Leaving her open to disease”? Etc. You continue to “argue” that something is WRONG yet have NO basis for doing so. The New Covenant condemns each, but it ALSO condemns sexual immorality, INCLUDING same-sex sexual relations! You cannot have it BOTH ways. You continue to ignore my questions. See 2 previous posts. Here’s another- If his wife consents would it be moral to visit a prostitute?
ARationalResponse 2 months ago
@ARationalResponse, I'm offering you a valid, rational, real-world reply, which you refuse to, or can't, accept because you're more interested in furthering your agenda than accepting the truth. If your spouse breaks his vows, lies to you, and leaves you vulnerable to disease, you'd be hurt, regardless of what religious lifestyle you choose. Do you really need a book to tell you such behavior is wrong? But two loving, faithful people, gay or str8, being together, hurts no one.
GodCreatesGays2 2 months ago
@GodCreatesGays2
You did NOT answer my questions. Answer the questions asked or you will be given no more space here. Will a lie hurt his wife if she does not know about it? I answer “Yes” to your question. For the LAST time- WHY are the things you mention about spouses wrong? “Hurts no one”? Say who? God declares that it DOES hurt the parties involved. It’s called sin.
ARationalResponse 2 months ago
"WHY are the things you mention about spouses wrong?"
Lying, cheating, and leaving your spouse open to disease are wrong because they are dishonest, deceitful, and dangerous. I don't need a book to explain that to me. Do you?
"God declares that (loving, monogamous gay relationships) DOES hurt the parties involved. It’s called sin."
Nope, he never has "declared" any such thing. Even in the man-written Bible, loving same-sex relationships are not condemned. Love is not sin.
GodCreatesGays2 2 months ago
@GodCreatesGays2
You do not pay attention. I asked WHY and I ask it again. “Lying is wrong because it’s dishonest”? That’s like saying “Lying is wrong because it’s lying”. How you can maintain that the Bible does not condemn same-sex sexual relations? If that is the case you should have answered the propositions/questions I asked. No one has yet dealt with them.
ARationalResponse 1 month ago
@ARationalResponse, you seem not have the ability to comprehend the written word. I said that lying is wrong because it results in the other person not knowing the truth, and therefore, being unable to choose what is best for his/her own life based on the facts rather than manipulation and misinformation. Perhaps the man-written Bible has been interpreted to condemn gays (and blacks, women, etc), but so what? God doesn't, and that's what counts.
GodCreatesGays2 1 month ago
@GodCreatesGays2
If the one lying is doing so to choose what is best for his/her life then that’s what is best for them and their happiness. Without appealing to a Higher law your approach is simply subjective & can be accepted or rejected by anyone. Again I ask- IF his wife consents would it be moral to visit a prostitute? I wrote that God (the Bible) condemns consensual same-sex sexual relations; not “gays”. How do you know what God does or does not condemn?
ARationalResponse 1 month ago
@ARationalResponse writes, "Given your position if the wife doesn’t know it then it would be ok."
Of course, that's not even remotely close to what I said. Adultery is wrong because it decimates the marriage, hurts, and lessens the bonds between husband and wife. A consensual two-person relationship, gay or straight, does not. You simply can't make a rational correlation between cheating on your spouse with loving and committing your life to one other person.
GodCreatesGays2 3 months ago
@GodCreatesGays2
Answer- Is it immoral if the wife doesn’t know? You ignored my other questions. I ask AGAIN- Happy for whom? What about his happiness; or the other person he’s with? Who says it has to be a “two-person relationship” or “ONE other person”? Is your “consensual two-person relationship, gay or straight” married or not? The ONLY thing you can appeal to is your own SUBJECTIVE opinion. Anyone can state the opposite and you CANNOT dispute it. You have NO basis for doing so.
ARationalResponse 2 months ago
@ARationalResponse, you have the right to express your own, subjective-but-unprovable opinion that the Bible has been perfectly translated, but of course, learned scholars on the subject disagree. Not to mention, there's the valid point about the Bible's being completely irrelevant to those who don't believe in it anyway. Your subjective "religious" opinions cannot be disputed, because they are based on blind faith, but the facts are empirical and cannot be denied.
GodCreatesGays2 2 months ago
@GodCreatesGays2
Again, my previous post you TOTALLY ignored my questions & points about the language of the Bible and the subject of interpretation. It’s not my opinion; it’s what the Bible teaches. “Perfectly translated”? No, but accurately & sufficiently translated. Because someone does not believe something does not make it irrelevant. Biblical faith is NOT blind; it is based on evidence. Read Hebrews 11:1. You continue to want to chase other issues. Start you own discussion & I’ll join in.
ARationalResponse 2 months ago
@ARationalResponse, your assertion that what the Bible "teaches" is "perfectly translated" IS merely your opinion. Learned scholars all over the world prove you wrong. That's the point. I didn't decline to answer the question; I just pointed out a truth you choose not to acknowledge. As well, your insistence on introducing totally irrelevant questions about prostitutes and unsuspecting wives belies your inability to refute the valid points I'm making ON TOPIC regarding gays.
GodCreatesGays2 2 months ago
@GodCreatesGays2
I wrote “accurately & sufficiently translated”. I repeat- Can the Bible be properly interpreted? It was written in the common language of the day. Did those of the 1st century understand each other in speech & writing? One should approach interpreting the Bible as they would any other written document. You will NOT apply your interpretive approach to other documents of antiquity or modern times. That’s disingenuous. The same applies to your so-called “learned scholars”.
ARationalResponse 2 months ago
@ARationalResponse: "Can the Bible be properly interpreted?"
Biblical scholars work on a "proper" translation, but since even they cannot agree, after decades or even generations of study, the probable, reasonable answer is "no".
"Will a lie hurt his wife if she does not know about it?"
It will hurt the relationship, because the man will distance himself from her, so whether she finds out about an affair or not, an affair ends up causing problems for all concerned.
GodCreatesGays2 2 months ago
@GodCreatesGays2
You did not answer- If his wife consents would it be moral to visit a prostitute? There are many people who lead “double lives” with no guilt of conscience
ARationalResponse 1 month ago
@ARationalResponse Documents of both antiquity as well as modern times are continuously revisited from perspectives that were not previously tried. Furthermore, each perspective that has already been used as a point from which to analyze a particular text are also constantly revisited, both to see if the theories they have brought about still hold up in the face of new evidence as well to see if these theories might offer more insight should they be taken a step further.
multismashify 2 months ago
@multismash
In my response to the video “For the Bible tells me so” there were/are certain fundamental assumptions. God exists; the Bible is God’s revelation to man; it has been properly translated; it can be properly interpreted; etc. These were/are not disputed even by them. The various issues that you & others attempt to raise are ones I am willing to engage in but not here. That is NOT the focus of this discussion. Start your own site; make your arguments and I will engage.
ARationalResponse 2 months ago
ARR, as well, that the Bible, in all its editions, translations, interpretations & editing, is not universally "clear" on anything. Many Christians, who choose to believe in it, have differing opinions about lots of its passages, translations & interpretations. No one can proclaim that his own, personal understanding of the Bible is the only definitive way to look at it. And he certainly can't use his own interpretations as any sort of argument for people who don't believe in the Bible at all.
GodCreatesGays2 3 months ago
@GodCreatesGays2
You regurgitate the same old assertions against the biblical text. Start your own thread or site and I’ll be glad to engage in such a discussion. That is not the focus or issue here. My videos and the video it is in response to are about what the Bible teaches. Such a discussion even on their part implies certain beliefs about the Bible, including its text & interpretation.
ARationalResponse 3 months ago
@ARationalResponse, yes, the discussion at hand assumes certain beliefs about the Bible are true, but without any universal agreement or proof, it's pointless to insist so.
GodCreatesGays2 3 months ago
@GodCreatesGays2
I know of nothing that has “universal agreement”? Truth is not a matter of “counting noses”. Can the Bible be properly interpreted? I affirm that it can be. It was written in the common language of the day. Did those of the 1st century understand each other in speech & writing? One should approach interpreting the Bible as they would any other written document. All language, whether written or spoken, is literal unless the context demands otherwise. We're doing that right now.
ARationalResponse 2 months ago
I grew up in a very religious family. Later in my life,I found out that I was homosexual. I have no attraction to men,and I fell in love with an amazing woman.This woman has saved my life. If not for her,I would have been dead long ago. But of course,according to you,God doesn't want me with this woman. I suppose that means he'd rather I be dead. If God made me gay, he seems to have done it for a reason. The person he sent me was a woman, and who are you to judge that?
ClubSealing 4 months ago
@ClubSealing
It is a blessing to have people who care and help us. I know people who have had “amazing” people help them “save their life” or they “would have been dead long ago”. Is that grounds for sexual relations? No. If you mean by “with this woman”, having a consensual sexual relationship with outside of marriage, then NO He doesn’t want you “with this woman”. It’s not “according to ME”; GOD’S judgment is what matters. Question is- what the Bible teaches?
ARationalResponse 4 months ago
@ARationalResponse Still at it I see. Get a life.
smurfboywv 4 months ago
@smurfboywv
Neither you nor anyone else is going to deter or intimidate me. If you don't have anything of substance to add to this discussion there is no need to comment. I won't post anymore of your comments unless they deal with the issue.
ARationalResponse 3 months ago
@ARationalResponse Was the idea not that it was their love that possibly saved her, just as it could for any individual? And I think love tends to bring with it an intimacy that makes the bond, and presumably the nature by which she was saved, much stronger. Just because they're women, it seems unfair that they aren't able to strengthen their bond and help each other and must instead deny themselves such things by forcing themselves apart. Forcing oneself upon someone you don't like seems worse
WingedDrant 3 months ago
@WingedDrant
As I wrote to "touchofgreatness" above, sexual conduct is the issue, not love. The concepts you speak of like "intimacy" and "strengthening their bond" and "help each other" can all be accomplished WITHOUT engaging sexual relations. Sex outside of marriage is sexual immorality. When a Bible believer denies that they find themselves in an impossible position. Those who reject the Bible are in an even greater dilemma.
ARationalResponse 3 months ago
Have you actually watched this video?
I really Don't think you have.
fungusproductions 4 months ago
@fungusproductions
If the video you are referring to is "For the Bible Tells Me So" by FirstRun Features the answer is "yes", I have watched all of it several times.
ARationalResponse 4 months ago
LITTLECARREY- If you want your recent post displayed take out the objectionable word. If not, no more postings. I dare say that the same hate, venom & ad hominem attacks you direct toward me you have NOT directed toward those of the documentary I responded to. Clearly it’s because I am saying what you don’t want to hear. You did NOT answer the propositions. Your baseless assertions have no place in rational discussion. BTW Islam is either a false religion or it is not. I believe it is.
ARationalResponse 4 months ago
Do you really think in all God's worries and dealings, that he would care if two human beings love one another? Regardless of gender. To say so, is to say that god is hateful, and I don't think you'd argue that. You're archaic and boring and luckily your kind wont be around for much longer. When you meet god, you'll see how wrong you were/are.
KidMoon23 5 months ago
@KidMoon23
God want us to love all people. However the video response addressed sexual conduct. Do you think God care with whom or what a human being has sexual relations? Why don't you answer the propositions/questions of the second video. If you don't believe the Bible then this video and the one it is in response to is not for you. Go live how you want and when you meet you will see how wrong you are.
ARationalResponse 4 months ago
@ARationalResponse No, I don't think God cares with whom or what one has a sexual relationship with. If both parties are consenting, and are giving each other love, leading to a more peaceful and fulfilling existence to all, why would he? Now sex with a minor or an animal is different because there is no consent. Now if you think God simply has a rule for whatever arbitrary reason that people of the same gender cannot have sex, you can think that. I think it's ignorance.
KidMoon23 4 months ago
@KidMoon23
What you or I think is irrelevant; what God thinks matters. The only way to know that is by the Bible. Can husbands & wives have sex with someone other than their spouse as long as it is consensual? Are you saying that those of NAMBLA & B4U-ACT are sinning? Who said there has to be consent? What’s your basis for “arbitrary”? Why stop at sexual conduct; what about lying, etc.? Why God commands a certain thing doesn’t erase man’s obligation to obey. Look forward to your answers.
ARationalResponse 4 months ago
These kind of people are the ones wrong with the world, everyone knows it and see it happen everyday. Its PROPAGANDA created by MEN and their genetically evolved ability to imagine wonderful stories,along with horrible nightmares. Plus their ALWAYS the ones with the most skeletons in their closets, not to mention themselves. I mean the way this guy acts/sounds/looks I see him more of a sexual predator to small children rather than a wanna be soldier of christ. Pathetic ignorance is all it is.
littlecarrey 5 months ago 9
@littlecarrey
More of the same; attack the questioner instead of answering the questions. If someone was a sexual predator to small children would that be wrong? If so, WHY?
ARationalResponse 5 months ago
@ARationalResponse I'm not giving u a 'rational response' because people like you have no rational thinking. Anyways Jesus came to me in a dream last night and instructed me to TELL YOU to "Go forth and spend thy social security on bowling, and scratch and win tickets but please STOP MAKING VIDEOS!!!" Remember thats not ME judging you, it's Jesus and I'd watch myself as well, even though he has the voice of, well an angel, he kinda sounded pissed off at you.
littlecarrey 5 months ago
@littlecarrey
You are not giving a rational response because you can't deal with the evidence. Personal attacks are the sign of shallow thinking. Perhaps you should try bowling or buying lottery tickets. You would have a better "chance" at winning the lottery than overturning the case I have presented against sexual immorality, both hetero & homo. By the way, you are judging me, but that's ok all of us make judgments everyday.
ARationalResponse 4 months ago
@ARationalResponse haha...ok dude.Nothing anyone/anywhere(PHD or not), except maybe ALLAH, can change your views obviously...I guess we'll agree to disagree. But i really do wonder that why a man of your age, has such a pessimistic attitude towards the world, and even more why a man of your age feels it necessary to try "scare" a new generation of youths?(75% of utube users) Wouldn't you have more dignity in death(with or without jesus) in knowing you made people happy in a shit filled world???
littlecarrey 4 months ago
@littlecarrey
My views are based on truth. Are you allergic to listening & logic? College degrees & age are irrelevant. “Pessimistic”? “Scare”? Thanks for the amateur psychological analysis of my motive & world outlook. Not here to discuss the false religion of Islam. Have integrity & answer the propositions of part #2. If you do not believe the Bible then this discussion is not for you. True & lasting happiness is doing God’s will; not living in sin. Anymore foul language & no more postings.
ARationalResponse 4 months ago
@ARationalResponse Your views are based on your opinion and misrepresentation of the bible, all this video does is make people hate you and god. So far you're doing a very good job!
smurfboywv 4 months ago
@smurfboywv
If your contentions were true you would have shown how I misrepresented the Bible. You and others have spewed your venom and hate because you hate the truth. Have I become your enemy because I tell you the truth (Gal.4:16)? If so...so be it.
ARationalResponse 3 months ago
@littlecarrey No need to get all feminazi about it. Besides, women can be just as horrible as men. They simply have less opportunity to show it.
TheObservantOne1 3 months ago
The phrase comes to mind, "if you could walk a mile in my shoe...". You have no idea what certain people go through, especially as young teenagers, when they realize they're gay. Based on your neophyte understanding of philosophy, allowing homosexual marriage would not lead to the marriage of 3 people or people marrying pets, etc, due to the slippery slope argument (look it up).
You try not accepting yourself and see just how good that is for your mental health and well being.
zcblalock 5 months ago 5
@zcblalock
Are you saying I need to "walk a mile in the shoes" of all conducts before I can make a moral judgment based on what the Bible teaches? "Look it up"? You are the one asserting something. You need to present the evidence to support it, not tell someone to "look it up".
ARationalResponse 5 months ago
the bible is wonderfull for making laws i mean it condones, slavery, stoning people to death for working on sunday and animal sacrifice
CoolBeanSquadron 6 months ago
@CoolBeanSquadron
Start your own discussion somewhere about any or all of those topics and I will be happy to participate. Those are not the topic of my video or that of the documentary "For the Bible Tells Me So".
ARationalResponse 5 months ago
@ARationalResponse no their not topics on your video, but if your going to blindly follow a book written thousands of years ago literally dont pick and choose wich passages to follow and then consider your self a "good christian" only doing what your religion tells you. just proving a point
CoolBeanSquadron 5 months ago
I still find the documentary "For The Bible Tells Me So" more persuasive than your rebuttal. Perhapse you could do a proper documentary in rebuttal!
macrent2 6 months ago
@macrent2
In view of the fact that you have not addressed the propositions/questions I asked in part #2 I can see why you would say such a thing. A "proper documentary"? Three propositions and one question was all that was necessary to expose the foolishness of "For the Bible Tells Me So" and all the Dr. of "divinity". Enough said.
ARationalResponse 5 months ago
The ONLY thing the "Bible" teaches us is how stupid and ignorant people REALLY are......they'll believe anything they see on print. I have no worries I'll burn in "Hell" .....since the Bible is all BS anyways. The only ones living in shame are the ones living a total lie ..."the bible cult"
fancyhazeleyes80 6 months ago
@fancyhazeleyes80
As with most of the others posts of other people you have shared only assertions. It adds nothing to the discussion.
ARationalResponse 5 months ago
"pro homosexual"? "bible teachings". I think I automatically smell bias against a certain class of people and for a certain book. I really don't care if the bible does or does not, science has time and time again shown bible opinion to be lacking. So what other evidence is there? I believe God accepts the conduct as well as he accepts straight conduct. It's not a conduct, it's human nature. It's not a sin issue. Which verse are we quoting when you quote "love the sinner, hate the sin?"
johngagon 6 months ago
@johngagon
Your assertions amount to nothing. If you want to start a discussion somewhere else about the Bible and science, etc. I will glad to participate, but that is not the focus of this video. You state what you "beleve God accepts"; the problem is the Bible does NOT support what you believe. What sexual conduct do you believe is NOT "human nature"?
ARationalResponse 5 months ago
@ARationalResponse No, The problem is you are a nut who puts a few versus about mensus and gay sex ahead of 99% of the rest of the bible regarding your hypocrisy. You look ridiculous trying to put scholarly robes on a pious raving zealot with personal issues. You're egocentric and selfish which means you can only think of what suites your own kink and taste and to hell with everyone else. Either that or more sadly, you are a closet nut. Waving a bible doesn't make your opinion fact to all.
johngagon 3 months ago
@johngagon
You spew hate and venom simply because you cannot answer the questions posed. If you want to practice and endorse sexual immorality go ahead but I have the right to oppose and expose it for the sin it is. Those of the video I am responding to believe the Bible though they present a perverted interpretation of it. This is clear from the fact that none of them attempted to answer my propositions/questions. If you do not believe the Bible then this discussion is not for you.
ARationalResponse 3 months ago
I would like to see a debate with you and the Bishop of Stockholm Eva Brunne
Aanthanur 6 months ago
@Aanthanur
If I had her email address I would send her the propositions/questions. I assure you she would fare no better than anyone else has in answering them while trying to endorse or practice "same-sex" sexual relations. If you know how to contact her listen to part #2 and send the propositions. Let me know how that goes.
ARationalResponse 6 months ago
If you want to be taken seriously, you shouldn't stereotype mate.
JeremiahClayton 6 months ago
@JeremiahClayton
Please share an example of stereotyping. This charge is humorous seeing that the documentary that I am replying to is filled with stereotyping. Watch part #2 and answer the propositions/questions mate. Thanks.
ARationalResponse 6 months ago
@ARationalResponse
I am positive you're old enough to have been learned the expression "two wrongs don't make a right" mate.
In regards to stereotyping:
In the above video, you talk about the hypocrisy of the pie thrown in the face of Anita Bryant, which I agree is a hypocritical action. However, you then say.. and I quote..
"And my friends, quite frankly that is par for the course for a lot of these individuals."
JeremiahClayton 6 months ago
@JeremiahClayton
There is nothing of hypocrisy here. It IS par for the course for A LOT of them. That is not an indictment of ALL. The same could be said of those who claim Christianity too.
ARationalResponse 6 months ago
@ARationalResponse "A LOT" denotes a great degree in terms of numerical values. Let's say there are 7,000,000,000 people in the world. If 1% are homosexuals, it would equate to 70,000,000 people. Now let's say "A LOT" was 1% of those people. (1% is rarely "A LOT" of anything, with a pool of 7b, once can make a case.) You would have had to personally interact with 700,000 homosexuals for your statement to be anything other than a stereotype. Sorry, but you stereotyped, mate.
JeremiahClayton 6 months ago
@JeremiahClayton
I’m not going to waste time quibbling over the quantity of homosexuals and their supporters who commit violence to advance their sinful cause. If you think that was stereotyping it was not my intention to do so. Now to more important things; do you agree with the statement by Dr. Laurence Keene of the documentary “For the Bible Tells Me So” that I addressed? If you do, please address the propositions/questions I asked in part #2. Thanks mate.
ARationalResponse 6 months ago
@ARationalResponse I'm sorry but I've never heard of an incident of homosexuals comiting random acts violence on straight people just for being straight , the oposite how ever i can think of at lest 3 incidences locally right off the top of my head
CoolBeanSquadron 5 months ago
@CoolBeanSquadron
I am not defending acts of violence against anyone, heterosexual or homosexual. I made that clear in video #1. The issue is "what does the Bible teach". That was the contention of the propaganda piece "For the Bible tells me so". Their contention is false.
ARationalResponse 5 months ago
Hey psychedellic420, If you want your posts allow you need to eliminate the "f" word. Thanks.
ARationalResponse 6 months ago
@psyche,
A couple of points: Why wouldn’t similarities in moral codes across the globe indicate a common source? I don’t think that the moral code came from religion either. I believe the evidence shows it came from God. Genetics and intelligence (human or animal) does not address the question of “WHAT is right and wrong” or “WHY is it right or wrong”. If I or someone else stated what we believe about a moral code and that belief was the exact opposite of yours, who would be right and why?
ARationalResponse 6 months ago
@psychedellic420
I did NOT ask you what you DON'T need to make moral judgments I asked you what your basis or criterion was for making moral judgments. Although this subject is not the focus of my video and the video I responded to (because that video was entitled, "For the BIBLE tells me so") please share your answer.
ARationalResponse 6 months ago
Evil demon get off youtube!
sweetbasil2010 6 months ago
@sweetbasil2010
You will not be posted if you cannot be cordial in your language. Since you labeled me as “evil”; why don’t you try and answer these two questions- What’s evil? How did you decide what is evil?
ARationalResponse 6 months ago
@psychedellic420
Have you taken the time to think of the implications when you wrote, "You have NO right to judge others"? Are you judging me for judging? Can we make any moral judgments? If so, what? and why? What might be your basis or criterion for such judgments?
ARationalResponse 7 months ago
@ARationalResponse You're a nutjob for sure, you're working for the devil. I'm reporting these stupid videos.
smurfboywv 6 months ago
@smurfboywv
Why don’t you deal with the issue instead of making personal attacks? You can report whatever you want.
ARationalResponse 6 months ago
@psychedellic420
Deal with the propositions/questions. Attacking me will not change what the Bible teaches. Dr. Mel White of Soulforce could NOT answer. Jimmy Creech of "Faith in America" could NOT answer. Dr. Peter Gomez of Harvard Divinity could NOT answer. Neither will you. They all knew the dilemma they would be in if they did. The pie in the face? Do you endorse assulting someone because they disagree with you.
ARationalResponse 7 months ago
Being gay is not a practice. And yes you can be gay and a christian this guy is ignorant.
smurfboywv 7 months ago
@smurfboywv
If you listened carefully to both videos then you know I addressed sexual relations. Can you practice fornication/sexual immorality and be a Christian? A man or woman may have a desire for or an orientation toward children or animals. Should they “feed” that or starve it? Should they act upon it or abstain from it? And upon what basis do you say one desire or orientation is acceptable or normal or moral and another not? Since I am ignorant I look forward to your answers.
ARationalResponse 7 months ago
@ARationalResponse Sharing a relationship with someone you love and share your life with is not fornication. Here's the Definition of fornication. for·ni·ca·tion (fôrn-kshn)
noun. Sexual intercourse between partners who are not married to each other. Well we're denied our right to marry, so we can't help it.
smurfboywv 7 months ago
@smurfboywv
It is God Who has denied two men or two women to marry. As I have asked TruAgape (which he/she has NOT answered)- Besides a man and a woman (Mark 10:6-9; 1 Cor.7:2-4; etc.), give another combination of a marriage the New Covenant authorizes. Does it authorize and endorse the marriage of 2 men or 2 women or 1 man and 3 women; a man & a dog? If so please share the Bible reference. I am confident you will fair no better.
ARationalResponse 7 months ago
"For the Bible Tells Me So" = worst, most illogical response to logical, rational thought and scientific evidence. also, something an indoctrinated 8 year old would say.
lmbrao2g 7 months ago
hah. of course a straight white christian man would hate this documentary. go get a life and keep out of everyone elses.
Cheesecow11 7 months ago
@Cheesecow11
It's NOT about me, my race, my sexual orientation, etc. it's about what the BIBLE teaches. That is the position of the documentary- "For the BIBLE Tells Me So". Of course they are wrong in their position. If you are taking the time to comment on & disagree with my video why would you attack me for taking the time to comment on and disagree with their's? Does this mean we BOTH need to "get a life & keep out of everyone else's business"?
ARationalResponse 7 months ago
@ARationalResponse As a devout Catholic, I can really understand your position towards this documentary. Believe me, as a homosexual, I'm struggling with this controversial issue. I have not come out to my family, who are also devout Catholics, for I still fear their reaction. That's why I've been immersing myself into research/Bible study about this topic because I want to know what is God's plan for someone like me and please him. I want to do good. Why would he have created me like this?
elektromani 7 months ago
@ARationalResponse By the way, I'm also studying Psychology. And together with my Bible study/research, as much as I would like to agree with you and what the Catholic/other churches teach, I still feel deep in my heart that homosexuality and other human conditions exist for a purpose. It doesn't make sense to me that can be born with an additional "sin," besides the original. So far, I believe it's really about showing unconditional love . Do you truly believe in it?
elektromani 7 months ago
@ARationalResponse The old testament cannot be used in today's world, Leviticus was written for the Levitites who were committing acts of rape, against men and boys, they were also worshiping idols and have prostitution in temple. That's what leviticus and sodom was about. For every video you and other people make like this, you cause more people to fall away from god, after all who wants to worship a god who is going to send them to hell for loving another person?
smurfboywv 7 months ago
@smurfboywv
The basis of my argument was the NEW COVENANT not the Old. I would appreciate it if you would please answer the propositions/questions I asked and we will proceed from there. God wants us to love all people. Sexual relations with someone is a different issue.
ARationalResponse 7 months ago
@ARationalResponse I forgive you for your ignorance, but I refuse to be your puppet.
smurfboywv 7 months ago
@smurfboywv
Thank you so much for answering the questions I asked. It is so refreshing to see such honestly and rationality. The sarcasm aside; PLEASE ANSWER THE QUESTIONS.
ARationalResponse 7 months ago
@ARationalResponse Please do us a favor, keep what you have to say to yourself, hating is a sin, condemning us is a sin, when I and other gay folks want your opinion we'll come to you. I pray that no one watches this video and goes out and starts killing gays. LOVE IS NOT A SIN. The Bible does not say only HETEROSEXUALS can love.
smurfboywv 7 months ago
@smurfboywv
Will you “keep what you have to say to yourself”? God has revealed that ONLY heterosexuals can marry. It’s amazing you can honestly listen to my first video about what the issues are and are not and then be concerned about someone going out and killing gays. I have never argued that love is a sin. What do you mean by “love”? Is the “love” you speak of platonic or sexual?
ARationalResponse 7 months ago
@ARationalResponse Well them heaven is going to be very empty because I don't want to be in heaven with people who preach that gays are going to hell. At least in Hell everyone will be with their partners and will be happy. Love is love, it has one meaning. Love has no boundaries and borders, and you cannot twist bible verses to make your point. I forgive you for your ignorance and intolerance but obviously you're just out to condemn people. Don't bother replying you make me sick.
smurfboywv 7 months ago
@smurfboywv
It’s your decision. You will have to live with it. No one will be happy in hell. Love is NOT love. It does NOT all have one meaning. God loves all people. Does that mean He will endorse and condone all conduct? Such is absurd. It is laughable that you tell me not to reply and it’s MY video. Again ridiculous.
ARationalResponse 7 months ago
@ARationalResponse 2 likes, 52 dislikes, I don't need to say anymore.
smurfboywv 7 months ago
@smurfboywv
If you listen to first video you know I make it clear that this issue will NOT be decided by the majority. Do you really want to take the position that moral issues are decided by the majority? If you want to go down that road let me know. We'll see far you can go before you recant it.
ARationalResponse 7 months ago