Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

If one is "born gay" how do you explain ex-gays?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by ok doser View Post

    if that was true we wouldn't need locks on our doors or police services

    heck, we wouldn't need laws



    i didn't say "lawless"
    The fact that the vast majority of the population respect the boundaries of basic morality, isn't really debatable is it? In 2018 there were 16,214 homicides in the U.S. Given the population of some 330 million people, that is remarkably low. If human beings were simply wired for evil as our "default position" as you claim, that stat and others like it would be exponentially, mind-bendingly higher (especially considering the estimated 5% of our population is comprised of psychopaths). Ditto the stats on theft and rape, etc...

    The fact that the majority of human beings on the planet follow their most basic moral wiring is evident, so I'm curious about precisely how you think our innate switch is stuck in the "evil" position.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by McCoy View Post

      The fact that the vast majority of the population respect the boundaries of basic morality, isn't really debatable is it?
      of course it's debatable, in the United States and elsewhere

      the vast majority of the population in this country turn a blind eye to the murder of unborn children, the vast majority accepts adultery, pornography, homosexuality as "normal"







      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by McCoy View Post

        I know it's seems off-putting to suggest-- particularly in this age of Buzzfeed articles and Wikis-- that one ought to rely on substantive scholarly treatises when wanting to learn about complex historical subjects. Magazine's typically ain't that place. Sorry dude.
        so you are ignorant of Der Spiegel's reputation

        that's very sad

        Having said that... I did finally look at the article in question.

        The good news is, it was written by Ian Kershaw who is in fact a preeminent WWII historian and an expert on Nazi Germany. I encourage you to read the entire piece.
        I did



        It does not support your initial claim by any stretch.
        it does

        my initial claim was that "when the societal boundaries and guidelines told the Volksgemeinschaft that the life of the Jew was without value and must be exterminated, they were happy to be compliant"

        NOT "when the societal boundaries and guidelines told the Volksgemeinschaft that the life of the Jew was without value and must be exterminated, they were happy to be EAGER PARTICIPANTS"


        None of this contradicts my initial rebuttal to your absurd and ahistorical assertion that the majority of the German people were willingly compliant with the systematic extermination of the Jews. The facts are far more complicated than disccusion group fodder. Kershaw states in the article:

        "Though Hitler's anti-Semitic paranoia was not shared by the vast bulk of the population, it plainly did not weigh heavily enough in the scales on the negative side to outweigh the positive attributes that the majority saw in him... "


        "did not weigh heavily enough in the scales on the negative side to outweigh the positive attributes"

        iow, compliant
        Last edited by ok doser; January 21, 2020, 12:55 PM.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by McCoy View Post

          No, I don't.

          Adultery is indeed immoral and wrong, but not in the same way or in remotely the same degree that rape is.
          that's because you're looking at it through the lens of selfishness, typically the viewpoint of the feminist liberal

          adultery, especially in the case of a married couple with children is so enormously destructive to so so many people


          rape is a buzzword today, that's worth a discussion in itself

          most of the really fun faux rape threads I had going got closed

          one of my faves https://theologyonline.com/forum/pol...05#post1418705




          Pedophilia is a horrible and disordered attraction, but unless acted upon is not remotely equivalent to actual rape. When a pedophile acts upon their urges, they commit rape-- albeit the most extreme and heinous type of rape that exists.
          not necessarily

          So, to reiterate-- you are grouping together different moral considerations under the specious "all sin is equal/ sin-is-sin" umbrella.
          nope, not doing that

          didn't mention masturbation, for example, if we're gonna remain in the confines of sexual sin

          or theft (less equal) or murder (more equal)


          when it comes to the three you mentioned, I count them as roughly equal, depending on the circumstances (see faux rape)

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by ok doser View Post
            so you are ignorant of Der Spiegel's reputation
            How many times do I have to tell you? I don't read magazines anymore, kid.


            Originally posted by ok doser View Post
            it does

            my intial claim was that "when the societal boundaries and guidelines told the Volksgemeinschaft that the life of the Jew was without value and must be exterminated, they were happy to be compliant"

            NOT "when the societal boundaries and guidelines told the Volksgemeinschaft that the life of the Jew was without value and must be exterminated, they were happy to be EAGER PARTICIPANTS"
            I read it correctly the first time. For perhaps the third time--your characterization of Germans as "happily compliant" with the extermination of Jews is ahistorical.

            The average German citizen was unaware about Hitler's extermination plans-- because those plans were always intentionally well-camouflaged. The average enlisted German soldier had little idea about the extent of Hitler's extermination plans, for that matter.

            However, occupied Poland and her people-- who were home to 6 of the 7 extermination camps-- had much more knowledge of the extent of the systematic atrocities that were raining down upon Jews, because they occurred in their own towns and cities. Also, prior to the death camps, the SS slaughtered hundreds of thousands of Jews openly in towns and villages IN POLAND.

            Again, these are challenging historical topics that deserve a lot more nuance and care than can be given in an online p*ssing match about the "gay gene".

            The fact remains-- your assertions on this topic are wrong and your summation of Kershaw's points are also incorrect.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by ok doser View Post


              didn't mention masturbation, for example, if we're gonna remain in the confines of sexual sin

              or theft (less equal) or murder (more equal)
              The guy who is proud of his “faux rape” threads now wants to talk about masturbation as one of the default “evils” man is capable of? No thanks.





              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by McCoy View Post

                The guy who is proud of his “faux rape” threads ...
                they were a lot of fun - helped me work through a lot of stuff I was dealing with in class, helped me understand a lot of the abnormal behavior that had puzzled me for years, here on tol.




                now wants to talk about masturbation as one of the default “evils” man is capable of? No thanks.
                are you a Christian?

                are you aware that this is a Christian board?

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by ok doser View Post

                  are you a Christian?
                  are you aware that this is a Christian board?
                  I’m a Christian. But if you find masturbation an urgent moral concern for human beings, I don’t really have anything productive to add to this discussion. Nor do I have an interest in farting back and forth with some guy who jokes and brags about his previous faux rape threads. So edgy! /s


                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by McCoy View Post

                    I’m a Christian.
                    i doubt it

                    i suspect you're a cultural Christian

                    or a catholic

                    But if you find masturbation an urgent moral concern for human beings,
                    i do, but it isn't really germaine to the discussion that Jefferson started about homos

                    I don’t really have anything productive to add to this discussion.
                    yeah, i've noticed

                    Nor do I have an interest in farting back and forth with some guy who jokes and brags about his previous faux rape threads.
                    dude - you would have fit right in with the other tards in those threads

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Derf View Post
                      A better explanation would be sin and repentance. But that's what the thread title was trying to get us to think about.
                      That might wash, if only the homophobes would take notice of about 500 other OT laws.
                      ....which they don't seem to do.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by eider View Post

                        That might wash, if only the homophobes would take notice of about 500 other OT laws.
                        ....which they don't seem to do.
                        Are you saying homosexuals don't have to repent as long as non-homosexuals don't? Why not turn that around and say that non-homosexuals don't have to repent until homosexuals repent? If our standard is always "the other guy", we are all doomed.

                        Which laws are you suggesting non-homos need to respect? Building a parapet on a roof? [Deu 22:8 NKJV] "When you build a new house, then you shall make a parapet for your roof, that you may not bring guilt of bloodshed on your household if anyone falls from it.

                        This only applies, obviously, when the roof is designed to have people on it as a matter of course. And we do follow this law anytime we get proper code approval for a house.

                        In the same way, there are numerous laws that don't apply, for various reasons, in the old testament. One is the offering of sacrifices for sin. The reason is that those laws had a specific purpose--to point forward to a time when our sin would be wiped clean by the blood of the ultimate sacrifice--Jesus Christ. Once that was done, there's no need to offer the sacrifices over and over again. But there's still a need to repent from sin, as Paul assures us:
                        [1Co 6:9 NKJV] Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites,
                        [1Co 6:10 NKJV] nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.
                        [1Co 6:18 NKJV] Flee sexual immorality. Every sin that a man does is outside the body, but he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body.
                        [1Co 6:19 NKJV] Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit [who is] in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own?
                        [1Co 6:20 NKJV] For you were bought at a price; therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God's.


                        So I think what you are trying to say is that Christians (sinners saved by grace) have no business helping other sinners enter the kingdom of God by that same grace. Do I have that correct?

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by User Name View Post
                          If one is "born gay" how do you explain gays who are "in the closet"?
                          I guess one would have to say, they were born in a closet.
                          So, what?

                          believe it!

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Derf View Post
                            Are you saying homosexuals don't have to repent as long as non-homosexuals don't? Why not turn that around and say that non-homosexuals don't have to repent until homosexuals repent? If our standard is always "the other guy", we are all doomed.
                            No I am not saying anything about repentance or doom, Derf, I am simply saying that a considerable % of people find that they fancy and/or fall in love with a person of their own sex. Your ideas of doom are yours, but when you 'in any way' get involved with the decisions of others about their own sexuality or identity then that does need to be stopped by good-reason and true-love. Where I live we lock up people who interfere with others or incite trouble for those with deffering sexual identities.

                            Which laws are you suggesting non-homos need to respect? Building a parapet on a roof? [Deu 22:8 NKJV] "When you build a new house, then you shall make a parapet for your roof, that you may not bring guilt of bloodshed on your household if anyone falls from it.

                            This only applies, obviously, when the roof is designed to have people on it as a matter of course. And we do follow this law anytime we get proper code approval for a house.
                            If you want to follow the OT laws as written, then follow them but don't add your own clauses. And the 106 sacrificial/ceremonial laws were removed by Jesus himself (I will have mercy and not sacrifice) and so the 507 others remain, very few of which you seem to bother about.... ?

                            In the same way, there are numerous laws that don't apply, for various reasons, in the old testament. One is the offering of sacrifices for sin. The reason is that those laws had a specific purpose--to point forward to a time when our sin would be wiped clean by the blood of the ultimate sacrifice--Jesus Christ. Once that was done, there's no need to offer the sacrifices over and over again. But there's still a need to repent from sin, as Paul assures us:
                            [1Co 6:9 NKJV] Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites,
                            [1Co 6:10 NKJV] nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.
                            [1Co 6:18 NKJV] Flee sexual immorality. Every sin that a man does is outside the body, but he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body.
                            [1Co 6:19 NKJV] Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit [who is] in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own?
                            [1Co 6:20 NKJV] For you were bought at a price; therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God's.
                            It's no good quoting Paul at me...... a man who never married in his lifetime as far as we know and who was clearly a bit thorny about sex, relationships etc.
                            What did Jesus say? Eh?

                            So I think what you are trying to say is that Christians (sinners saved by grace) have no business helping other sinners enter the kingdom of God by that same grace. Do I have that correct?
                            No you don't have that correct. Good Christians, all Christians (not just your particular Creed or following) can by all means offer help to other people, but when it becomes interfering, oppressive, bigoted, subjective etc it needs to be stopped by the people and the laws of their lands where possible.
                            Same-sex couples, partners and spouses need to be respected for their love and left alone, but some extremists can't leave 'em alone, it seems.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by eider View Post
                              ... a considerable % of people find that they fancy and/or fall in love with a person of their own sex...
                              and its estimated that eight to ten times that percentage find that they fancy and/or fall in love with a child


                              Where I live we lock up people who interfere with others or incite trouble for those with deffering sexual identities.
                              so where you live pedophiles rights are respected?

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Derf View Post
                                Are you saying homosexuals don't have to repent as long as non-homosexuals don't? Why not turn that around and say that non-homosexuals don't have to repent until homosexuals repent? If our standard is always "the other guy", we are all doomed.
                                I think what he was saying was that there are 613 OT commands in the Mosaic code-- approximately 600 of which are either silently disregarded or else conveniently explained away by apologists as unbinding for today's Christians. All of which makes the practice of dumpster-diving discarded Levitical purity codes and using them against homosexuals, to be all the more hypocritical and disingenuous.

                                The verses in which Yahweh personally sanctions slavery (both the debt slavery of fellow Hebrews and the chattel slavery of foreigners), were believed to be valid, by the majority of scripture's readers, for roughly 1700 + years. Paul also reinforced the ancient practice, giving a straight-thru line for the institution that stretches across both Testaments.

                                In 2019, virtually no serious Christians on the planet think slavery is a moral practice and the concept is universally regarded as evil-- in stark contrast to the words of Yahweh.How did this happen? How did something so universally approved by holy text for several millennia, come to eventually be regarded in civilized countries as evil? The answer is simple: culture.

                                Enlightenment ideas that took hold in 18th century Western culture slowly changed the majority view in the Church and in the world. It wasn't easy. And large numbers of Christians fought against the change vehemently... and even violently. But in the end, culture-- not Scripture-- transformed the way we view morality. The same is slowly becoming true for homosexuality as well.
                                Last edited by McCoy; January 23, 2020, 07:47 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X