Marital Counseling for Libertarians and Social Conservatives

Southern Man said:
Since homosexuality perverts the design of Creation, and renders God’s purpose of procreation moot, we know that the claim of some homosexuals that they were “born homosexual” is a myth. God NEVER creates anything that interferes with His purpose and design. The only thing homosexuals were born with was the ability to decide to sin, and give way to a perverse lust, or to walk with the Lord.
Take a look at some of the foundations of Creation.
Genesis 1:11 says, “Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth; and it was so.” (Quotes are from the KJV)
Verse 12 reads, “And the earth brought forth grass, and the herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind; and God saw that it was good.”
Now we move to the creation of mankind. Genesis 1:26, 27 says, “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them.”
The foundational rule was everything reproducing “after his kind.” Nowhere was there a suggestion of any variance in this rule. Homosexuals do not reproduce. They kill the whole reproductive process.
Following the fall of Adam and Eve, and their removal from the Garden of Eden, Satan began perverting the purposes of God in the human race. The very first reference to a homosexual act in Scripture occurs when Ham, the son of Noah, went into his father’s tent while Noah was in a drunken stupor, and “saw the nakedness of his father.” (see Genesis 9:22)
While somewhat euphemistic, this phrase is a Hebrew metaphor which literally means to engage in illicit sex with. The phrase appears other places in Scripture, but this incidence is quite telling.
Verse 24 of the same chapter says, “And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him.”
This was not a case of Ham simply stumbling into his father’s tent and accidentally finding him naked. His act toward his father had lifetime consequences that extended to every generation that came forth from his loins.
Since Ham already had a son, Canaan, Noah could not cut off the seed coming forth from his son, so he said, “Cursed be Canaan: a servant of servants shall he be to his brethren.” (verse 25)
The further consequence of Ham’s sin of homosexuality is illustrated in the fact that the seven sons of Canaan each fathered tribes that became nations occupying all of what generally became known as the land of Canaan. Those seven nations were identified as the Hittites, the Jebusites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, the Girgashites, the Amorites, and the Canaanites. The curse of Noah upon Ham’s seed was, in reality, God’s curse; and in Deuteronomy 7:1, 2, the Lord says to Moses, “When the Lord thy God shall bring thee into the land whiter thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than thou; And when the Lord thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them: thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them; Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son……”

From Regner A. Capener.

Torah: the first five books of the Bible: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.
Click to expand...

Let's take another look at what you wrote.

First, I think it's fair to say Ham was bisexual as he had a son.

Second, considering God wanted to populate the world we have to ask why He would want Noah to kill all the descendants in the seven nations his grandchildren founded. His cursing Canaan because of Ham's "indiscretion" and wanting all those people killed is like that old expression "cutting off ones nose to spite their face" unless homosexual tendencies are inherited.

Due to Noah living a long life it ended up Noah had to kill his grandchildren, great grandchildren and great, great children. Most likely, by that time, both Ham and Canaan were dead so the killing of their progeny wouldn't affect them.

So, was God punishing Noah? We have no reason to believe that so why did God insist on Noah killing all those people? The logical conclusion is sexual preference is passed on from generation to generation meaning it's not a choice one consciously makes.

From genetic studies we know some genes are expressive while others are not but may become expressive in future generations.

A point to ponder: Why did God flood the entire world? How did God determine everyone was evil? A theory put forward is in those days there were giants, offspring of angels/gods and the daughters of men. They were known as the Nephilim

(Excerpt)The Nephilim were an antediluvian race (pre-flood) race which are referred to in the Bible as giants. They were reportedly the children born from the "daughters of men'', and the "Sons of God''. It is most important to note that they are mentioned almost simultaneous to God's statement that He would destroy the earth by flood, and it seems from this association that their affect upon mankind was one of the primary justifications that brought the destruction.
Genesis 6:1 "When men began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, 2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose." (End)
http://www.nwcreation.net/nephilim.html

The fallen gods who mated with earth women were known as the Annunaki, the fathers of the Nephilim.

(Excerpt)Numbers 13:32 "And they brought up an evil report of the land which they had spied out unto the children of Israel, saying, The land, through which we have gone to spy it out, is a land that eateth up the inhabitants thereof; and all the people that we saw in it are men of great stature. (33) And there we saw the Nephilim, the sons of Anak, who come of the Nephilim: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight." (End)
http://www.keyway.ca/bibles/asv04.htm#C13V1

It's reasonable to conclude the Annunaki, the sons of gods, the progenitors of the Nephilim, mixed their DNA with that of earthly women resulting in homosexual or bisexual behavior in their offspring. Consequently, one could say homosexual or bisexual behavior is godly inspired or due to the influence of gods.

What say you? :)
 
Dixie said:
Yes he did, when I have time, I will find the passage. He used the example of "men lying with men" to denote how despicable something was, I can't recall the exact context, but it's indeed in there, because I have read it. Now he did not directly speak of homosexuality or say it was a sin or anything, as far as I know... but he did speak of it, and not very highly. From my understanding of what he said, it wasn't something to be very proud of.
Click to expand...

Mathew 15:18-20 18 is Jesus speaking to the Pharisees and his disciples about sexual immorality. Damo wishes to split the hair that he did not specify "which sex act" makes for sexual immorality so therefore Christ does not condemn homosexuality...
 
Ice Dancer said:
Mathew 15:18-20 18 is Jesus speaking to the Pharisees and his disciples about sexual immorality. Damo wishes to split the hair that he did not specify "which sex act" makes for sexual immorality so therefore Christ does not condemn homosexuality...
Click to expand...
The one who is attempting to drum up something that isn't there isn't me. The man didn't mention homosexuality, no matter how much you try to make it so.
 
Damocles said:
The one who is attempting to drum up something that isn't there isn't me. The man didn't mention homosexuality, no matter how much you try to make it so.
Click to expand...

He did not need to, no matter how much you say he did. His audience already KNEW that homosexuality is an abomination against God. It would have been inclusive in his speaking about "sexual immorality". It is persons such as you who wish to split a hair that would have been non-existant to Israelites in Christ's day. You would have to find a scripture where Christ says homosexuality is A-OK to support what you wish...you cannot.
 
apple0154 said:
Let's take another look at what you wrote.

First, I think it's fair to say Ham was bisexual as he had a son.

Second, considering God wanted to populate the world we have to ask why He would want Noah to kill all the descendants in the seven nations his grandchildren founded. His cursing Canaan because of Ham's "indiscretion" and wanting all those people killed is like that old expression "cutting off ones nose to spite their face" unless homosexual tendencies are inherited.

Due to Noah living a long life it ended up Noah had to kill his grandchildren, great grandchildren and great, great children. Most likely, by that time, both Ham and Canaan were dead so the killing of their progeny wouldn't affect them.

So, was God punishing Noah? We have no reason to believe that so why did God insist on Noah killing all those people? The logical conclusion is sexual preference is passed on from generation to generation meaning it's not a choice one consciously makes.

From genetic studies we know some genes are expressive while others are not but may become expressive in future generations.

A point to ponder: Why did God flood the entire world? How did God determine everyone was evil? A theory put forward is in those days there were giants, offspring of angels/gods and the daughters of men. They were known as the Nephilim

(Excerpt)The Nephilim were an antediluvian race (pre-flood) race which are referred to in the Bible as giants. They were reportedly the children born from the "daughters of men'', and the "Sons of God''. It is most important to note that they are mentioned almost simultaneous to God's statement that He would destroy the earth by flood, and it seems from this association that their affect upon mankind was one of the primary justifications that brought the destruction.
Genesis 6:1 "When men began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, 2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose." (End)
http://www.nwcreation.net/nephilim.html

The fallen gods who mated with earth women were known as the Annunaki, the fathers of the Nephilim.

(Excerpt)Numbers 13:32 "And they brought up an evil report of the land which they had spied out unto the children of Israel, saying, The land, through which we have gone to spy it out, is a land that eateth up the inhabitants thereof; and all the people that we saw in it are men of great stature. (33) And there we saw the Nephilim, the sons of Anak, who come of the Nephilim: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight." (End)
http://www.keyway.ca/bibles/asv04.htm#C13V1

It's reasonable to conclude the Annunaki, the sons of gods, the progenitors of the Nephilim, mixed their DNA with that of earthly women resulting in homosexual or bisexual behavior in their offspring. Consequently, one could say homosexual or bisexual behavior is godly inspired or due to the influence of gods.

What say you? :)
Click to expand...

I say you had diarrhea of the keyboard. You start off with an obvious wrong and keep going, but in five different directions. Are you on crack?
 
Threedee said:
If its covered in Genesis, then its before the time of Moses...
Click to expand...

Yeah, but those books were not compiled into any religious work before Moses. They were just scattered stories.

There is no proof that Ham committed any homosexual act. It's a stretch and it does not fit into the context of the story. Remember Ham's brothers turned their heads and covered Noah, which was meant to contrast Ham's acts. I don't think Noah would have felt covering him was much good if he had just been anally raped.
 
Ice Dancer said:
He did not need to, no matter how much you say he did. His audience already KNEW that homosexuality is an abomination against God. It would have been inclusive in his speaking about "sexual immorality". It is persons such as you who wish to split a hair that would have been non-existant to Israelites in Christ's day. You would have to find a scripture where Christ says homosexuality is A-OK to support what you wish...you cannot.
Click to expand...

Since the contention was that Christ did not mention homosexuality, how would that help?

But if you are going to make such a stretch, then what about when Jesus praised the commitment of a gay couple?
 
RStringfield said:
Since the contention was that Christ did not mention homosexuality, how would that help?

But if you are going to make such a stretch, then what about when Jesus praised the commitment of a gay couple?
Click to expand...

He would not have needed to mention homosexuality to an audience of his peers; the Pharisees and his own disciples, while discussing sexual immoralities.

Nowhere in the bible is homosexuality accepted. Jesus Never praised the commitment of a gay couple!
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Then you intend to adhere to all of the laws laid out in the OT?? :good4u:
What does the Bible say about excessive "self love"; because you've been fucking yourself, all day. :chesh:
Click to expand...

"YOU" would imply this is an argument I am personally making, and it is not, as much as you would love for it to be. I have repeatedly said, I am not a Christian. I merely pointed out what Christians believe, and you are welcome to disagree, it doesn't change what they believe.

RStringfield said:
Many religious folks, like Jews?
Click to expand...

No, like pretty much all Christians AND Jews.

You guys have to understand how the Bible works, and none of you seem to. The Old Testament is full of tenants and mandates from God, people were stoned to death for fornication like homosexuality, and less. Jesus brought the New Testament message of temperance, tolerance, forgiveness, and love. Christians... true Christians, should condemn homosexual behavior, but love the homosexual. The Old Testament didn't become irrelevant with the New Testament, the things that were carnal and illicit in the Old Testament, are still just as bad in the New Testament, Christians just don't need to stone you to death for it anymore.
 
Dixie said:
"YOU" would imply this is an argument I am personally making, and it is not, as much as you would love for it to be. I have repeatedly said, I am not a Christian. I merely pointed out what Christians believe, and you are welcome to disagree, it doesn't change what they believe.
Click to expand...

Unfortunetly, you didn't state it as what you felt others would believe; instead you made it appear that it was your belief.

Your previous post and my reply are below:

Dixie said:
You may be right, I was thinking it was Jesus. Nevertheless, Jesus did speak out against sexual indulgences. Also, the OT says that God Himself proclaimed homosexuality an 'abomination'. To many religious folk, God kinda trumps Jesus.

Just sayin...
Click to expand...

USFREEDOM911 said:
Then you intend to adhere to all of the laws laid out in the OT?? :good4u:
What does the Bible say about excessive "self love"; because you've been fucking yourself, all day. :chesh:
Click to expand...

If you're going to attribute a comment to others, then may I suggest that you word it as such.
 
Well we've narrowed it down. Gayness is the wedge between libertarians and regular conservatives. on the issue that matters globalization, they are generally in lockstep, and thats all the handlers care about.

The "tea party" is an establishment device to give sheeple starting to wake up a glimmer of something different, but then homogenizing them back into globalist brainwash victims in the end, by "purifying" the party as they have to "unify their message".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top