http://koti.phnet.fi/elohim/Releasing_f ... osexuality
During the next chapters we are going to take a look at homosexuality and its underlying factors. We will discuss the origins of homosexuality and whether it is possible to be freed from it and also what the Bible says about it. You might have a different opinion on some of the issues brought up, but it will still be worthwhile reading the whole text.
Homosexuality and being freed from it
Moderator: Moderators
Re: Homosexuality and being freed from it
Post #3Wow…talk about flawed reasoningPetriFB wrote:http://koti.phnet.fi/elohim/Releasing_f ... osexuality
During the next chapters we are going to take a look at homosexuality and its underlying factors. We will discuss the origins of homosexuality and whether it is possible to be freed from it and also what the Bible says about it. You might have a different opinion on some of the issues brought up, but it will still be worthwhile reading the whole text.
Let me address just some of the faulty bits in this:
by the se token there is no hereditary reason why some people are left handed that does not change the fact that left-handedness is an inborn trait.From: http://koti.phnet.fi/elohim/Releasing_f ... osexuality
“However, it has been impossible to find even one hereditary reason for it. No gene or other such hereditary factor is found which could cause homosexuality.”
There is no evidence to back the assertion that a man’s relationship with his father has any impact on his sexual oriention.From: http://koti.phnet.fi/elohim/Releasing_f ... osexuality
Rejection by your father. Maybe the most typical for homosexuality in men is the absence of model of a warm and loving father. If one's father has been hot-tempered, indifferent and hostile, this can result in the boy or the man starting to look for men's approval, because he didn’t get it from his own father.
If this were to be the case we could identify certain populations that would have a higher incidence of homosexuality. If this claim were to have merit then we should observe a greater incidence of homosexuality in men born in the late 1930’s when a significant number of fathers were serving and dying in World War II. This is not the case. A more current example: If this claim were to have merit then we should observe a greater incidence of homosexuality among African American men given the high degree of absentee fathers in that community.
This conjecture also fails when one notes that their are a significant number of gay men who do not have/have not had strained relationships with their fathers or had absent fathers yet are still homosexual and that there are a significant number of heterosexual men who did/do have a strained relationships with their fathers and/or absent fathers yet are still heterosexual.
There is no evidence to back the assertion that a man’s relationship with his mother has any impact on his sexual oriention.From: http://koti.phnet.fi/elohim/Releasing_f ... osexuality
The mother's influence. Also the mother has her own part in the origins of homosexuality. If she separates the children from their father, or binds them too strongly to her instead of her husband and takes her son to be her confidant, it can come to a great harm. The affection of the mother can psychologically mislead her son, and as he has to be the confidant, it can be difficult for him to separate his own sexual identity from that of the mother. He might then follow after the model of his mother than of his father.
Similarly this conjecture fails when one notes that their are a significant number of gay men who do not have/have not had strained relationships with their mothers yet are still homosexual and that there are a significant number of heterosexual men who did/do have a strained relationships with their mothers and/or absent fathers yet are still heterosexual.
again it must be noted that there is no evidence to support this conjecture.From: http://koti.phnet.fi/elohim/Releasing_f ... osexuality
Wrong demands. Another factor causing homosexuality can be if parents are disappointed to have got a boy instead of a girl, and subconsciously try to force their child to the role of the opposite sex, for example by dressing the boy into the clothes of girl.
The author seems to be confusing sexual oriention with gender identity.
Psychologically, homosexuals are no different than heterosexuals. In 1957 with a grant from the National Institute of Mental Health, Evelyn Hooker embarked on the first study to determine the relationship between homosexuality and psychopathology. She studied two groups, one comprised of thirty homosexuals and the other of thirty heterosexuals, and matched them for age, IQ, and education. None of the members of either group had ever undergone any psychiatric treatment. After having both groups complete three major psychological evaluations -- the Rorschach, Thematic Apperception (TAT), and Make-A-Picture-Story (MAPS) tests -- Hooker had experts in the three testing fields try to identify from the subjects’ results which subjects were homosexual. None of the experts was able to positively identify a subject as being either homosexual or heterosexual (UCD 6; Burr, Atlantic). As Edwin Shneidman, the psychologist asked to examine the results of the MAPS tests, noted, “I wish I could say that I see it all now, that this is the profile of a person with a homosexual orientation, but I can't see it at all”
Richard Schmiechen Changing Our Minds: The Story of Dr. Evelyn Hooker. Simon & Schuster 1995
yet again…there is no evidence to suggest that childhood sexual trauma or molestation has any impact on sexual oriention.From: http://koti.phnet.fi/elohim/Releasing_f ... osexuality
Incest from someone of the same sex, can also cause homosexual behavior.
The conjecture falls apart when confronted with individuals who were sexually molested as a child by a member of the same gender yet grew up to be heterosexual and with homosexuals who were not sexually assaulted as children
the author either lacks a basic knowledge of genetics or is purposefully misleading his audience.From: http://koti.phnet.fi/elohim/Releasing_f ... osexuality
But as we noted before, homosexuality is not inborn, but is a question of circumstances and one's own choices. If it was hereditary, it would be probable that for example from a group of three children all would become homosexual. This however doesn't usually take place. We can also think that the parents and grandparents should also be homosexual. Them not being so tells us, that homosexuality is not hereditary or inborn.
Genetic traits are not necessarily directly passed on. there exist recessive genetic traits that may lay dormant for generation.
Left handed individuals can for example, be born to right handed parents
In 1993. Dean Hamer, examining the family trees of gay men, noticed a pattern of inheritance through the maternal side; Hamer found gay men to have more maternal relatives who were gay than paternal relatives.
Dean Hamer et al, "A Linkage Between DNA Markers on the X Chromosome and Male Sexual Orientation" Science 261 (1993-JUL-16): pp 321-27.
tehr eis significant evidence that this passage is and has been mistranslated.From: http://koti.phnet.fi/elohim/Releasing_f ... osexuality
- (1 Cor 6:9,11) Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders
11. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
The Greek word Paul used in this passage is arsenokoites, Ancient Greek contained very specific words meaning homosexual, homosexuality and homosexual acts, Paul did not use any of these words.
attempts have been made to defend the translation of arsenokoitesas homosexual rely on a common error of looking at the two parts of arsenokoites, arsLn (man)and koitLs, (bed) and say that "obviously" the word refers to men who have sex with men. This approach is linguistically invalid. It is highly precarious to try to ascertain the meaning of a word by taking it apart, getting the meanings of its component parts, and then assuming, with no supporting evidence, that the meaning of the longer word is a simple combination of its component parts. To "understand" does not mean to "stand under." In fact, nothing about the basic meanings of either "stand" or "under" has any direct bearing on the meaning of "understand." It is equally justifiable to look at the component words of arsenokoites and say that Paul was condemning the lazy.
The only reliable way to define a word is to analyze its use in as many different contexts as possible. The word "means" according to its function, according to how particular people use the word in different situations. When one looks art the usage of the word arsenokoites in writings of the same era as the writings of Paul one finds that no one lese was using arsenokoites to denote homosexuality, rather the word is used to describe a man who finically exploits a woman for sexual favors, or more simply, a man who employees prostitutes.
Post #4
Allow me to enter the discussion. I've just opened a topic on the possible secret connection between homosexuality and a safe conduct of the forces of resurrection (The Forbidden Letters).
In an article on those Letters, the one by the CE2, the following is published. www.world-mysteries.com/PhilipGardiner/ ... tters5.htm [paragraph 1]
In an article on those Letters, the one by the CE2, the following is published. www.world-mysteries.com/PhilipGardiner/ ... tters5.htm [paragraph 1]
"Homosexuality is an abomination to God, and a grevious sin. So why would we believe any of this?"
Then 'Coffeeshop' replies:
"My kid-brother is homosexual and I must admit that I don't trust the teachings on homosexuality in the bible at all.
Imagine, God created the universe, the galaxies, and everything, and then he becomes unbalanced by homosexuals making love? A love that can't even hurt anybody. One thinks, that cannot be true.
Somebody once said: we all know how homosexuality became condemned in the bible: Moses had something against homosexuality, and therefor God had something against homosexuality. The prophet taking too easily his own will for the will of God.
And let's look what the Bible actually says about the source of homosexuality. It is punishment for sin. Here is the part.
21] Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
[22] Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
[23] And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
[24] Wherefore God also gave them
(He himself gives them up to this! So he has a part in this too!)
up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
[25] Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
(That Amen tells me that Paul is not at all sure about his way of 'reasoning' here.)
[26] For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections:
(Again, God is at least partner here.)
for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
[27] And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
[28] And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
[29] Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
[30] Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
[31] Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
Gay people are all that? Some of the finest people on earth, like Plato and da Vinci and Michelangelo? Without natural affection? Inventors of evil things?
[32] Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
So (32) God punishes men for their sins with the homosexual act. And for that act they have to be punished again? I think that only works for homophobic people.
I think I know what is going on here. This is Paul who wants to save the demand for the death penalty of the Old Testament, and who doesn't understand why there can be an omnipotent God who hates homosexuality, and a gay-life at the same time. And hence the terrible mess in Romans.
And on top of this: the letters claim that the New Testament is merely a vehicle for alchemy (and they say homosexuality is a requirement for alchemy). Now, we don't know whether that is true, but it explains the, let's say, sligthtly unheterosexual Jesus is in the Gospels (fiction, alchemical fiction, according to the Paris 4).
On top of that, you can get anything from the Bible. What about Jonathan and David for instance? That's not merely about friendship... "
Post #6
haha, this topic is not even fun. Comeone, you serious?by the se token there is no hereditary reason why some people are left handed that does not change the fact that left-handedness is an inborn trait.
The above quote reminded me a fun ´investigation´ done. It said that people being "earlybirds" (waking up early), are more likely to be succesfull in life and so forth, whiles "late bird" (sorry, dont know the word) are more likely o become unemployed, junkies etcetera.
Im not joking, this was a true study i read, a Serious one. For the not so fast in cognition, perhaps yhey can draw the conclusion that if you GO UP early in the morning, you ill come to WORK, SCHOOL or whatever it may ne, whiles if you DONT go up, and sleep to, lets say 1300-1400, you less likely to go to school, and have a rather specific job. So the entire study is CORRECT in a sense, but damn silly in whole..
Oh, why i say this? Topic anyone? Gays being "freed"? Hello ?
T: ´I do not believe in gravity, it´s just a theory.´
