Gay wedding

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
U

UnderGrace

Guest
I agree, it has historically been politically loaded. However, the above study is pretty conclusively showing that gay men do have innat biological responses to a specific gender, to the exclusion of the other. That much is clear.

I think if we are going to have an intellectually honest discussion then it's important to recognize where science ends and politics begins. One is robust and testable, and the other is entirely subjective.
Politics aside, you do agree that these were men that had sex with other men (homosexual) do you agree that behaviour changes our brains....this as well is a documented fact.

Are you trying to state that this behaviour is innate from birth please clarify?
 
U

UnderGrace

Guest
Again, agreed. It's called neuroplasticity, and it means that brainwave patterns and neural pathways can be altered in response to stimuli, environment, brain chemistry and thought processes. That said, they can also be altered by brainwashing, torture, and abuse. Neuroplastic changes can be a result of wanted and active participation or they can be a result of oppressive practices/confinement/abuse/violence etc.

But what this study shows is that, for gay people, there's an instinctive neurological correlate for their attraction tendencies, similar to that which straight people experience.

I know all about it...no need to educate me....well then so then all we know is that homosexuals are aroused by the behaviour they have engaged in or been exposed to...that is all we can deduce from the study.
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
28,783
7,270
113
No on has said going would make you gay, that is pretty funny though.

Glad you clarified.:)
Waggles said to be in their presence means you are partaking of their sin. I may have paraphrased that somewhat, but that was the gist of it. How do you interpret that? His assertion was ridiculous. Did Jesus partake of sin to be in the presence of sinners? Of course we know He did not. One can be in the presence of sinners and not partake of their sin. Oh, you also walk with feet in two different lanes, holding to views the majority disagrees with while expecting others to conform to your view because it is in the majority. Your response to JesusLives also left me puzzled. She did not use a euphemism for sin as you erroneously claimed. Your response also gave the impression that you are/see yourself as sinless. Really quite extraordinary after all your posts in the NBW thread.
 

calibob

Sinner saved by grace
May 29, 2018
7,165
4,842
113
65
lawton ok
They were listed as weaknesses, to show the infallibility of all men, which Scriptures confirms in multiple ways, necessarily including Biblical heroes who are still known for their sins as well as triumphs. know ;)
I think the word you wanted was 'fallibility' as they all failed to live perfect sinless lives but God still used them and their faith even though weak at times was still counted as righteousness.
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
28,783
7,270
113
I think the word you wanted was 'fallibility' as they all failed to live perfect sinless lives but God still used them and their faith even though weak at times was still counted as righteousness.
Haha, you are so right :) Thank you for the correction, Bob :)
 

Ohm

Junior Member
Mar 4, 2018
160
34
28
I know all about it...no need to educate me....well then so then all we know is that homosexuals are aroused by the behaviour they have engaged in or been exposed to...that is all we can deduce from the study.
What I am saying is that young men have continually been shown to have instinctual sexual arousal responses to other men, to the exclusion of women. Now, considering that a great number of homosexuals grow up in cultures where homosexuality carries severe social and/or legal penalties: what behaviour or learning is there within their cultural paradigm to cause them to have adopted homosexuality as a sociological response?

The question is entirely valid. Why would a person, having grown up in an anti-homosexual environment, with nothing to gain by being homosexual, have an instinctual sexual affinity for men rather than women?

The only rationale is that there is an organic component.
 

Ohm

Junior Member
Mar 4, 2018
160
34
28
Politics aside, you do agree that these were men that had sex with other men (homosexual) do you agree that behaviour changes our brains....this as well is a documented fact.

Are you trying to state that this behaviour is innate from birth please clarify?
Well, to the extent that attraction to the opposite sex is present from birth. What I'm saying is that for these young men, who were part of this study, homosexual attraction would seem to be their default setting.
 
U

UnderGrace

Guest
Well, to the extent that attraction to the opposite sex is present from birth. What I'm saying is that for these young men, who were part of this study, homosexual attraction would seem to be their default setting.
And...????
 
U

UnderGrace

Guest
Now, considering that a great number of homosexuals grow up in cultures where homosexuality carries severe social and/or legal penalties: what behaviour or learning is there within their cultural paradigm to cause them to have adopted homosexuality as a sociological response?
Can you support this statement from research?
 

calibob

Sinner saved by grace
May 29, 2018
7,165
4,842
113
65
lawton ok
What I am saying is that young men have continually been shown to have instinctual sexual arousal responses to other men, to the exclusion of women. Now, considering that a great number of homosexuals grow up in cultures where homosexuality carries severe social and/or legal penalties: what behaviour or learning is there within their cultural paradigm to cause them to have adopted homosexuality as a sociological response?

The question is entirely valid. Why would a person, having grown up in an anti-homosexual environment, with nothing to gain by being homosexual, have an instinctual sexual affinity for men rather than women?

The only rationale is that there is an organic component.
I think quite often it's neurological.
 

CS1

Moderator
May 23, 2012
4,417
1,017
113
They were listed as weaknesses, to show the infallibility of all men, which Scriptures confirms in multiple ways, necessarily including Biblical heroes who are still known for their sins as well as triumphs. I did not say eating locusts was a sin. The word weakness was at the beginning and end of the list, with Scripture provided using the very same word... not sin. Responding to what I actually post works better for me. John living in the desert and subsisting on locusts and honey... people no doubt thought he was quite an oddball. Being an outsider is seen as a weakness by some, just as not being attractive is seen as a disadvantage. Those people are forever known in this present world for their weaknesses, oddities, disadvantages, and yes, their recorded SINS too, as well as their triumphs. You may have missed the context, which was about the fallibility of humans. Paul identified as a sinner in the present tense, and not just as a sinner, but as the worst of sinners. Chocolate is not mentioned in the Bible as far as I know ;)

locust was listed as a weakness? I do not know what commentary or allegory used to find that application. No, I did not miss the context, Paul did not identify as a sinner but a sinner saved by Grace.

We need to look at is the context. Let’s see what Paul says in verses 12-14. I put the key words in bold type. 1tim 2

“ 12 I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who has strengthened me, because He considered me faithful, putting me into service, 13 even though I was formerly a blasphemer and a persecutor and a violent aggressor. Yet I was shown mercy because I acted ignorantly in unbelief; 14 and the grace of our Lord was more than abundant, with the faith and love which are found in Christ Jesus.” (NASB)​
Was Paul saying, “I’m still a blasphemer, persecutor and “violent aggressor?” No, that would inconsistent with all his other teachings. Paul was clearly reviewing his former life and contrasting that with his current ministry as an apostle, proving just how deep God’s mercy and grace will go to save someone acting so heinously as himself.

Paul is basically saying if God can save me, His poster child for amazing grace, He can save anybody!
He is not saying his identity with past sins, his identity is in Christ now


;)
 

calibob

Sinner saved by grace
May 29, 2018
7,165
4,842
113
65
lawton ok
Homosexuality may be caused by chemical modifications to DNA

By Michael BalterOct. 8, 2015 , 9:45 AM


A new study of male twins, scheduled for presentation at the annual meeting of the American Society of Human Genetics (ASHG) in Baltimore, Maryland, today, could help explain that paradox. It finds that epigenetic effects, chemical modifications of the human genome that alter gene activity without changing the DNA sequence, may have a major influence on sexual orientation.
The new work, from Eric Vilain's lab at the University of California (UC), Los Angeles, is “exciting” and “long overdue,” says William Rice, an evolutionary geneticist at UC Santa Barbara, who proposed in 2012 that epigenetics plays a role in sexual orientation. But Rice and others caution that the research is still preliminary and based on a small sample.
 

CS1

Moderator
May 23, 2012
4,417
1,017
113
That's your take-away?
lol That is not all I said or what you stated too. Let me help you.
your post here :

RickyZ
"Look at this from Kevin's side...


I'm sure there are plenty who called him a "[email protected] sinner, yer going to hell fggt, no I won't come to your party of sin"

I wouldn't want to go talk to someone like that later.

On the flip side, Kevin knows that there's at least one person who doesn't agree with what he is doing, but loves him enough to just be there. He would go talk to someone like that.

He wouldn't kiss Saul. Right and wrong are still getting an audience with him. And we wouldn't know about that opening to pray over if I hadn't been there to see it. That IS something he will want to talk about some day.

He'll come to me. He won't to CS1."

Cs1 resonds here:

"You do what you believe is what God wants you to do, but don't have false narratives to support your discretion. I did not or will call anyone a [email protected] sinner I am one saved by grace Out of my sin. 2. I have never said to anyone " yer going to hell fggt". That is your own words you chose to use to justify your decision. DO not try to make this about something no one here has said. "

"Of Course, he will come to you your family Why would he come to me? My Cuzin did come to me and I told him I could not do your marriage because God is not in it. When someone is sinking I do not throw them an Anchor I throw them a Life Ring."
 

CS1

Moderator
May 23, 2012
4,417
1,017
113
I do not know your cousin, mother, or sister, or why you mention them. Jesus said, "Whoever does God's will is my brother and sister and mother." God's revealed written Word also says He wants us to love kindness, and that it is His loving kindness that draws us to repentance.
I was not speaking to you in this post it was in response to another Person. I'm sure you do not know them as I do not know RickyZ, nephew.
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
28,783
7,270
113
I was not speaking to you in this post it was in response to another Person. I'm sure you do not know them as I do not know RickyZ, nephew.
You most certainly were. You quoted me and that was your response.
locust was listed as a weakness?
What? No. Do you have problems with English? He ATE locusts. He was seen as an oddball. An outsider. You know what? Forget it.
 

Waggles

Senior Member
Sep 21, 2017
3,338
1,243
113
South
adelaiderevival.com
an evolutionary geneticist at UC Santa Barbara, who proposed in 2012 that epigenetics plays a role in sexual orientation.
what has Darwinism to do with understanding truth about sin and the power of Satan?
evolutionary geneticist there is the first problem - false science.
 

CS1

Moderator
May 23, 2012
4,417
1,017
113
what has Darwinism to do with understanding truth about sin and the power of Satan?
evolutionary geneticist there is the first problem - false science.
a liberal school which is as much credibility as the APA claim of gay as a lifestyle.
 

ToastAndTea

Well-known member
Jul 31, 2018
246
321
63
No quite incorrect.
It is a malady of the heart, of the soul.
Out of an evil heart come evil actions and evil thoughts.
Jesus spoke to this.
Deep down it's a spiritual and moral issue no matter how many people try to explain it away.

Have you heard of the Metropolitan church in the US? They affirm that homosexuality is part of the will of God and is actually a gift given by God. Interesting and also quite disturbing.
 

calibob

Sinner saved by grace
May 29, 2018
7,165
4,842
113
65
lawton ok
what has Darwinism to do with understanding truth about sin and the power of Satan?
evolutionary geneticist there is the first problem - false science.
a liberal school which is as much credibility as the APA claim of gay as a lifestyle.
Does either of you think that most people walk around in touch with their spirit now days? I was about 24 y.o.a. before I came to believe I had one. All I did here was to see if there are any neurological links or causes for homosexuality. Do either of you know of any theologians with MD's and specialize in neurology?

And as far as the APA goes who do you think determines the curriculum Psychologists and counselors are tested with? And who determines how to classify consumers (patients) so the medical and or treatment bills get paid. This education is required by law for professionals in the field from counselors up.