Bishop Paul Morton Message to Bishop Eddie Long

[Apaquelypse]

That is true to an extend. But if you are continuing in your sin (being a thief, habitual liar or homosexual) and don't make efforts to try to change that behavior, then how effective will that message be from whoever is delivering it?

I think it would kinda crass for a cat to preach against something he admits he's actively involved in and will not change his behavior. Why would anyone want to even listen to that guy?

Outside of Jesus, name me one cat who preached dont sin that wasnt sinning? Paul was still sinned (though not a sinner) up until his death and had a pretty effective ministry. Look at what Jonah did, even after the country was converted he still was mad in heart that God had saved them.

Now, im not saying that any of us should just live any kinda way and chalk it up to grace that we are still in the right relationship with Christ, but the truth of the matter is, we are, God just doesnt condone us abusing it

 

[JayRob]

Pretty good information but u didnt answer my question....in your opinioin, when you say born that way do you mean they are born attracted to the same sex or born having sex with the same sex?

I answered your question in the first line when I said "simply born with female tendencies and whatever else that entails just like most heterosexuals are born attracted to the opposite sex."

 

[JayRob]

To quote you ...
I even offered a suggestion as to how you might get started.

I knew you wouldn't be able to find any evidence to support your claims. Next time, be careful what you post.

The Scriptures condemn the action. I have no power or authority to condemn anyone. It is the action that the Scriptures speak of, not the disposition of the person. That is what I have spoken to and asked for any scientific evidence that even those persons said to be born with such a condition are incapable of choosing their own actions. Nothing has been presented to show that the behavior is innate.

When you present evidence from the bible, proving that a person can't be born homosexual, then I'll take your claims seriously. It's just like most other posts you've made on a subject.
You just quote verses, but you post no extrabiblical evidence to support those verses. The evidence you attempt to post, is usually found to be false, in error or both. The present case is no different.

Really??!!
Of course this is the conclusion of the same scientist who offered the suggestion ... who was also not involved in the study.
Pheremones do not CONTROL behaviors in humans. That is one of the things that lifts us above the animals.

The brain controls behavior in humans. As was mentioned earlier, what about hermaphrodites? If a woman/man can be born with female and male genitalia, how can one deny the brain activity that can be effected by biological makeup while the fetus is in the mother's womb?
There's ample evidence to show that when males have more intake of estrogen hormones, they develop female tendencies and characteristics. The same occurs with females when they have more of an intake of male hormones.
Your bible presents nowhere near such evidence. All it presents are opinions of ancient writers who knew practically nothing about hormones.

Sorry to be unintelligent, but my question is anything but sudden. Behavior has been my issue all along and nothing has been offered from any scientist to say otherwise.

You're the one whose saying that it's a sin to be a homosexual based on words from an ancient book. Up to this point, you've presented nothing to show that homosexuality, to an extent, isn't related to one's biological makeup.

The Scriptures make me think that. The testimonies of millions who have been delivered from sin tell me that. The lie is that that cannot change; the truth is that Jesus makes it available to them and they have to receive the gift of salvation. So, they are supposed to go past the lie to live the truth.

Why would they need to change in the first place? If they are two consenting adults doing what they do in the "privacy" of their own home or wherever, what's it to you?
And how can you make the claim that all homosexuals can change when most cancer patients, diabetic patients and most heart disease patients go unhealed after praying to the biblical god?
The claims that you make about millions of homosexuals having been healed holds no more water than your previous statement that millions of cancer patients have been healed.
Fact of the matter is that based on the process of elimination, most cancer patients die and most homosexuals remain homosexuals after having prayed to the biblical god.

1 Tim1:9-17

Verses say absolutely nothing about a homosexual being healed. Not surprised though.

[*]Rom 7:5

Verse says nothing about a homosexual being healed.

[*]Rom 8:3-9

Again, the verses do not say one thing about a homosexual being healed. Passions of the flesh can refer to a hundred other things that heterosexuals do.
You'll believe anything just because it's in the bible regardless if it's fiction. Why is that? You've shown those tendencies time and again.

God will not stop you from sin any more than a locked door will stop a thief from stealing if that is what he wants to do. We are back to choosing again. God did not make Adam, Eve, or Jesus robots and He is not doing that with any of the rest of us.

You continue to make statements that have no basis in science and no basis in biology. You just make a statement based on a "belief" and you suddenly count that belief as being fact, when in essence all it is, is an "opinion" in a book written by men who had no knowledge the hormonal makeup of humans.
That's no better than a little child believing that the stranger has candy in his car, so the naive child gets in the car and is kidnapped because he naively believed.
Up to this point, you've not produced a shred of evidence showing that a person can't be born homosexual.

 

[Apaquelypse]

I answered your question in the first line when I said "simply born with female tendencies and whatever else that entails just like most heterosexuals are born attracted to the opposite sex."

And for clarity can you define "female tendencies" and "what ever else that entails"?

 

[dacontinent]

When you present evidence from the bible, proving that a person can't be born homosexual, then I'll take your claims seriously. It's just like most other posts you've made on a subject.
You just quote verses, but you post no extrabiblical evidence to support those verses. The evidence you attempt to post, is usually found to be false, in error or both. The present case is no different.

I'm totally at a loss as to why I should need anything extra-biblical in order to walk in obedience to the Bible. That would be absolutely stupid OF ME.

The brain controls behavior in humans. As was mentioned earlier, what about hermaphrodites? If a woman/man can be born with female and male genitalia, how can one deny the brain activity that can be effected by biological makeup while the fetus is in the mother's womb?
There's ample evidence to show that when males have more intake of estrogen hormones, they develop female tendencies and characteristics. The same occurs with females when they have more of an intake of male hormones.
Your bible presents nowhere near such evidence. All it presents are opinions of ancient writers who knew practically nothing about hormones.

You are still talking about tendencies when I asked about behaviors. Have I been unclear? Do homosexuals have the capability to think past their instincts and make a decision to not engage in homosexual behavior? I don't know how to ask any more directly.

You're the one whose saying that it's a sin to be a homosexual based on words from an ancient book. Up to this point, you've presented nothing to show that homosexuality, to an extent, isn't related to one's biological makeup.

You are incorrect, sir. What I have said that is it is a sin to PRACTICE homosexuality. As for the extent of it being tied to one's biological makeup, you already don't believe that of all homosexuals.

Why would they need to change in the first place? If they are two consenting adults doing what they do in the "privacy" of their own home or wherever, what's it to you?
And how can you make the claim that all homosexuals can change when most cancer patients, diabetic patients and most heart disease patients go unhealed after praying to the biblical god?
The claims that you make about millions of homosexuals having been healed holds no more water than your previous statement that millions of cancer patients have been healed.
Fact of the matter is that based on the process of elimination, most cancer patients die and most homosexuals remain homosexuals after having prayed to the biblical god.

They would need to change in order to be obedient to the Word of God. What they choose to do in the privacy of their own homes is ENTIRELY up to them. I will fight for them to have those rights where such behavior is legal. Their ability to express or promote acceptance of such behavior IN THE CHURCH is prohibited by the Word of God. So, that is where I have the most concern.

Verses say absolutely nothing about a homosexual being healed. Not surprised though.
...
Verse says nothing about a homosexual being healed.
...
Again, the verses do not say one thing about a homosexual being healed. Passions of the flesh can refer to a hundred other things that heterosexuals do.
You'll believe anything just because it's in the bible regardless if it's fiction. Why is that? You've shown those tendencies time and again.

Make no mistake about it: I do believe the Scriptures. There will be no apologies for doing so. How I wish you would receive Christ and the indwelling of the Holy Ghost so the fact that Christ came to save sinners (1 Tim 1:15) - including those who practice homosexuality - would not be lost on you; the succombing to our tendencies (Romans 7:5) leads us to reap the wages of sin (Romans 6:23); that to be Spiritually-minded (and not spiritually-minded - Romans 8:3-9) brings life and peace while being carnally-minded produces death. Then, you might understand that the benefit of walking with Christ extends to those who have practiced homosexuality and want to be delivered. But, since you don't have the indwelling Spirit of God, that understanding eludes you.

You continue to make statements that have no basis in science and no basis in biology. You just make a statement based on a "belief" and you suddenly count that belief as being fact, when in essence all it is, is an "opinion" in a book written by men who had no knowledge the hormonal makeup of humans.
That's no better than a little child believing that the stranger has candy in his car, so the naive child gets in the car and is kidnapped because he naively believed.
Up to this point, you've not produced a shred of evidence showing that a person can't be born homosexual.

Somehow you continue to want to demand that the Bible be a science book. It is not and was never intended to be. It is a spiritual book. Science and logic will never conclude that the death of One perfect sacrifice would be sufficient recompense for all the sin that has been or ever will be committed. I dare say that is understood by every believer who posts on this board. You are not among those persons. So, you continue to find the suggestions of scientists more palatable. That is your prerogative. It won't change the Scriptures, and it won't change my believing in what they teach us about God, believers, the world, and evil.

 

[JayRob]

And for clarity can you define "female tendencies" and "what ever else that entails"?

I'll let you answer that one. Use your imagination.

 

[JayRob]

I'm totally at a loss as to why I should need anything extra-biblical in order to walk in obedience to the Bible. That would be absolutely stupid OF ME.

It would also be ignorant of you to continue to believe that the earth was flat and that it was the center of our galaxy too. Those religious folks didn't need any proof, all they needed was what was in the bible, which is quite similar to what you're doing. They say the apple don't fall far from the tree and it surely applies here.

You are still talking about tendencies when I asked about behaviors. Have I been unclear? Do homosexuals have the capability to think past their instincts and make a decision to not engage in homosexual behavior? I don't know how to ask any more directly.

Didn't I clearly state that behavior begins in the mind? Isn't that what the Jesus figure stated when he said, "For from within, out of men's hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly (Mark 7:21-22).
Why do you insist on ignoring the brain part, but you have no problem focusing on the act itself?

You are incorrect, sir. What I have said that is it is a sin to PRACTICE homosexuality. As for the extent of it being tied to one's biological makeup, you already don't believe that of all homosexuals.

Why isn't it a sin to THINK homosexual thoughts, yet it's a sin to "practice" homosexuaity? There's no consistency. Either both are sin or both aren't.....according to the bible.

Nevermind the fact that animals all over the world are known to engage in homosexual acts, yet they were created by the same god who wrote the bible.
As far as homosexuality being a choice, for some it is. For some, it isn't.

They would need to change in order to be obedient to the Word of God. What they choose to do in the privacy of their own homes is ENTIRELY up to them. I will fight for them to have those rights where such behavior is legal. Their ability to express or promote acceptance of such behavior IN THE CHURCH is prohibited by the Word of God. So, that is where I have the most concern.

So, your god, whom you claim to be the creator of all animals can create homosexual animals and allow folks to be born homosexuals, yet condemn them for something they have no control over? How unjust and tyrannical can one be?

In case you didn't know, all vertebrate embryos are inherently female. We all start life as females. It takes some kind of added effect—such as a hormone at the right moment during development—to transform the growing embryo into a male. But, left to its own devices, the embryo will naturally become female.
What if that embryo doesn't get the right amount of male/female hormones at the right time, then what? Who do you blame then?
In short, there's more to being homosexual than religious folks want to know or admit. Some just naively blame the actual victims and seem to have no problem with it. Thank goodness for science, or there would probably be mass killings of homosexuals by some just because a book says it's wrong.

Make no mistake about it: I do believe the Scriptures. There will be no apologies for doing so. How I wish you would receive Christ and the indwelling of the Holy Ghost so the fact that Christ came to save sinners (1 Tim 1:15) - including those who practice homosexuality - would not be lost on you; the succombing to our tendencies (Romans 7:5) leads us to reap the wages of sin (Romans 6:23); that to be Spiritually-minded (and not spiritually-minded - Romans 8:3-9) brings life and peace while being carnally-minded produces death. Then, you might understand that the benefit of walking with Christ extends to those who have practiced homosexuality and want to be delivered. But, since you don't have the indwelling Spirit of God, that understanding eludes you.

Like I stated earlier, you can extend those verses to a hundred plus sins, but not one of those verses specifically mentions anything about homosexuality. In short, there's no record of one homosexual having ever been healed in the bible.

What's the big deal anyhow? You've already claimed that "works" are not important or necessary for salvation, so what's the big deal if one is a homosexual? According to you, all they need is faith for salvation.

And you keep making excuses about a holy spirit and "understanding". Your thoughts are just that, YOUR thoughts. You can accuse/credit a holy spirit of giving you thoughts until the cows come home, but fact of the matter is that your thoughts are your thoughts or else you can label yourself a medium. Mediums receive word from spirits just in case you forgot, and it's condemned in the bible.
You are a medium if spirits talk to you, no matter the kind of spirit.

Somehow you continue to want to demand that the Bible be a science book. It is not and was never intended to be. It is a spiritual book.

There's a reason why the bible was never intended to be and scientific book. If it was, no one would be a Christian, due to it's many scientific statements that have been found to be untrue. Nevermind the fact that the bible tries to speak on scientific matters.
Fact of the matter is that the bible is a book based on nothing. Just "believing" is being very naive.
The average person has no idea who wrote the words of the bible, but have been talked into believing that the words are actually TRUE. What other field of thinking could get away with such nonsense other than the field of fiction and religion? It's incredible what religion does to people, without them even realizing it. There's no need for evidence.....JUST "believe".

Science and logic will never conclude that the death of One perfect sacrifice would be sufficient recompense for all the sin that has been or ever will be committed. I dare say that is understood by every believer who posts on this board.

The followers of Horus said the same thing. The followers of Dionysius said the same thing. The followers of Kristna said virtually the same thing. What do all of the above names have in common with Christianity? They were considered to be perfect "saviors" who died and came back to life for humanity just like the Jesus character.
The followers of those religions believed in their savior hundreds, if not thousands of years, before the Europeans decided to form their own god-man savior in the Jesus character. In short, Jesus is not different in his description than Horus, Dionysius or Kristna.

You are not among those persons.

You're right, because I chose to take an objective step back and look at the actual history of religion and the history of religious "saviors" who supposedly died and came back to life.

So, you continue to find the suggestions of scientists more palatable. That is your prerogative. It won't change the Scriptures, and it won't change my believing in what they teach us about God, believers, the world, and evil.

Suggestions?! Religion is more related to "suggestion" than science ever will be. Science requires actual evidence for the most part. Religion requires a mere "belief", supported by nothing. Faith is substance of things HOPED for, the evidence of things NOT SEEN.

As far as changing the scriptures, the very history of the scriptures you read were taken from previous religions that existed hundreds and thousands of years before the Jesus figure or Christianity came on the scene. Only difference is that the names, characters, times and places were changed to accomodate the Christian audience, which is primarily European.

Note: Continue to believe in religion if that helps you get through the daily rigors of life. If it gives you hope for the future, hang on to it with all your might. Just be honest enough to admit when it's inaccurate.

 

[dacontinent]

Didn't I state that behavior begins in the mind? Isn't that what the Jesus figure stated when he said, "For from within, out of men's hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly (Mark 7:21-22).
Why do you insist on ignoring the brain part, but you have no problem focusing on the act itself?

You have stated that behavior begins in the mind and I have agreed with you. I have stated that the mind has the ability to control those behaviors and asked you if there is any scientific evidence to the contrary for homosexuals. I am still waiting for you to answer that. I am not asking you to produce it, point me to a link, book, or article. You can do those things if you want. It is not personal. I am simply asking you for information if you know it. If you don't know of any, just say "I don't know of any" and let it go at that.

 

[dacontinent]

For anyone interested in more on this subject, Charisma magazine has great articles this month. Janet Boynes is on the cover.

Promotional video clip

 

[Apaquelypse]

I'll let you answer that one. Use your imagination.

No sir....when you belittle my God and His statues, you try to quote Him word for word. I think you should make yourself just as transparent by answering the question.

 

[Kendrick]

Well, today I spoke to a female pastor who said she lived as a lesbian for more than a decade. She said during those years she was a homosexual, she was convinced that was her destiny. Then one day she said that it all changed. That she sought out the Lord and change her ways.

It wasn't easy of course, according to her, but she now functions as a woman who now has her own ministry that specifies in "rescuing homosexuals." And she said she's seen the behavior of those whose she worked with change as a result.

She said one can "pray the gay away" just like folks who are able to overcome alcoholism or drug abuse through prayer and seeking the Lord.

I spoke to another pastor (who never was gay by the way) who said that in all his years as a clergyman, that the thousands of homosexuals he's encountered (and helped deliver from homosexuality) were raped or sexually assaulted. That unfortunate trauma caused them to be gay, he said. He said he's certain that homosexuals are not born gay.

So I sure learned a ton to say the least.

 

[JayRob]

You have stated that behavior begins in the mind and I have agreed with you. I have stated that the mind has the ability to control those behaviors and asked you if there is any scientific evidence to the contrary for homosexuals. I am still waiting for you to answer that. I am not asking you to produce it, point me to a link, book, or article. You can do those things if you want. It is not personal. I am simply asking you for information if you know it. If you don't know of any, just say "I don't know of any" and let it go at that.

Information given on the brain and bodies hormonal makeup should've been sufficient enough evidence to let you know that a person's hormonal makeup dictates what kind of brain or thoughts he or she will have.
That should be obvious without me having to present more information.
A person could be in a male's body, but his biological and/or hormonal makeup could have him thinking like a female and having female tendencies.

 

[JayRob]

For anyone interested in more on this subject, Charisma magazine has great articles this month. Janet Boynes is on the cover.

Promotional video clip

The article is biased and non-objective from the start just like I figured it would be.

The article presents no scientific data supporting it, just one person's "opinion".
The article makes claim that anyone who believes that a person is born homosexual is deceptive, yet they provide not a shred of scientific literature to support such claims.

Nature has shown that some animals practice homosexuality. Science has shown that a person's hormonal makeup can drastically effect that person's masculine or feminine tendencies. For such an article to make such claims, it's dishonest and deceptive and based solely on religion.

 

[JayRob]

No sir....when you belittle my God and His statues, you try to quote Him word for word.

Belittle your god? I think most people, including Christians, belittle gods of rival religions. Isn't that true?

As far as me belittling "your" god, it seems that you're confusing my stating facts with belittlement, which isn't the case at all.
Stating obvious errors and inconsistencies in a book is not belittling a "god".
If a book was written by an all-powerful, omnipotent and omnipresent "god", it shouldn't be filled with the following: unscientific statements, violence, genocide, racism, plagiarized writings, unfulfilled prophecies, untrue history, etc.. Wouldn't you agree?

Any book that makes claim that it was inspired by "the Supreme Intelligence" of the universe deserves and should be questioned with a fine-toothed comb to verify if it can live up to such a standard as evidence.

I think you should make yourself just as transparent by answering the question.

Any person who has seen a male acting like a female should know what female tendencies mean. Dressing like a drag queen, rolling of the eyes, hand gestures females tend to do, word enunciation with emphasis on certain letters, voice tone that females tend to use, walking like a female, desiring to wear or dress like females would, talking about subjects females like to talk about.
That's what I meant when I said, "female tendencies". I think you already knew this though.

 

[JayRob]

Well, today I spoke to a female pastor who said she lived as a lesbian for more than a decade. She said during those years she was a homosexual, she was convinced that was her destiny. Then one day she said that it all changed. That she sought out the Lord and change her ways.

It wasn't easy of course, according to her, but she now functions as a woman who now has her own ministry that specifies in "rescuing homosexuals." And she said she's seen the behavior of those whose she worked with change as a result.

She said one can "pray the gay away" just like folks who are able to overcome alcoholism or drug abuse through prayer and seeking the Lord.

I spoke to another pastor (who never was gay by the way) who said that in all his years as a clergyman, that the thousands of homosexuals he's encountered (and helped deliver from homosexuality) were raped or sexually assaulted. That unfortunate trauma caused them to be gay, he said.
.....So I sure learned a ton to say the least.

You may have learned a lot, but you took a minister at his word? What else is a minister supposed to say? That no one was effected positively after they were prayed for in "Jesus' name"? Would you expect him to admit such?

Where's the evidence that the minister delivered THOUSANDS from a gay life-style? Would all of those people actually TELL their preacher everything that they do in the privacy of their own domain? Long didn't, and he was supposedly a man of the cloth, so what do you expect the average layperson to tell? Church members, especially males, don't always tell preachers everything that's going on in their life, especially when it comes to the bed and homosexuality. They'll keep that a secret until either they've been caught or they die.

From personal experience, ministers 99.9 percent of the time will tell a person a story that leans in favor of the bible. They hardly ever tell stories about the failures of prayers for healing. Instead, they'll blame it on the person and say that their faith wasn't strong enough, or they'll fall back on the "it wasn't god's will" excuse. It never fails to happen that way.

I'd rather lean on scientific verification than a person's opinion. There's just too much evidence in nature and in biology that clearly leans towards the belief that folks can be born homosexual.

He said he's certain that homosexuals are not born gay.

Before Galileo, the clergy thought and taught that the world was flat and was the center of the galaxy. It didn't occur to them to consult with actual scientists to find out. Even when they did come to the truth, they wanted to still kill him.
The preacher who claimed to KNOW that homosexuals aren't born that way is no more a scientist than the clergy who taught others to believe the world was flat and that the earth was the center of the galaxy.
His loyalties are to the bible and the bible alone.

 

[dacontinent]

The article is biased and non-objective from the start just like I figured it would be.

The article presents no scientific data supporting it, just one person's "opinion".
The article makes claim that anyone who believes that a person is born homosexual is deceptive, yet they provide not a shred of scientific literature to support such claims...

You are correct. Nothing scientific intended at all.

 

[dacontinent]

Information given on the brain and bodies hormonal makeup should've been sufficient enough evidence to let you know that a person's hormonal makeup dictates what kind of brain or thoughts he or she will have.
That should be obvious without me having to present more information.
A person could be in a male's body, but his biological and/or hormonal makeup could have him thinking like a female and having female tendencies.

Are you ever going to answer the question? Or maybe you should answer Apaquelypse's question about tendencies first. Perhaps that will give me the answer to my question.

 

[Apaquelypse]

Wouldn't you agree?[/B]

I disagree. Before there was a man made science there was God. Before man could coin the term violence, the battle between God and Satan was already underway. Before there could be a "genocide" God had already developed a thing we man later called "creationism". Before there was a race of people to be involved in "racism" there was already God and the Angels occupying Heaven in an ordered civilization. Before man could plagerize, there was already God's word. And because you haven't lived long enough, you really can't say a prophecy hasn't been fulfilled, a more accurate statement would be that they aren't fulfilled YET. And please don't go there about history being untrue. The Bible is not a history book, though it does contain parts of history.

Any book that makes claim that it was inspired by "the Supreme Intelligence" of the universe deserves and should be questioned with a fine-toothed comb to verify if it can live up to such a standard as evidence.

And to that I say, the intelligence to develop this "fine tooth comb" is derived from whom again? Please don't tell me that a man, any man, can stand toe to toe with God and outsmart God.



Any person who has seen a male acting like a female should know what female tendencies mean. Dressing like a drag queen, rolling of the eyes, hand gestures females tend to do, word enunciation with emphasis on certain letters, voice tone that females tend to use, walking like a female, desiring to wear or dress like females would, talking about subjects females like to talk about.
That's what I meant when I said, "female tendencies". I think you already knew this though.

That makes a person a homosexual? No sir!!! What that does though is make you sexist!!! The only thing that makes a person a homosexual is.......(drum roll please).....is having sex with the same sex!!! A man putting on a dress makes him no more a homosexual than a woman in make up a hetrosexual. Do you not realize that some Scottish men wear skirts? That the same mechanism or movement of the bones and muscles that allows both men and women to walk are the same?

Jayrob, your homosexual facts that you use debate have large amounts of holes in them. According to science, both homosexuals and hetrosexuals both have the genetic design to be attracted to others, but also according to this same science, our make up doesn't tell us "who" or "what" to be attracted to. Like there are no genes to be attracted to "sheep" or "red bones" or "big booty b's" or "tall dark and handsomes." Thats a matter of "preference" or in laymans terms "whom one prefers." This same science also does not state that there is a gene imbedded in any of us to have sex, I.e. There is no scientific bodily need for sex. This science also states that the sex organs in and of them selves are for reproduction. Therefore the organs were predesigned to procreate only, masturbation, casual and homosexual sex are matters of preference and not innate.

Now the Christian stance and probably most other religions stance is that male to male or female to female sex is sin because the God of all religions say it's sin. Your science or its facts or hypothesis' can disprove or reprove God Jay, but urrr it appears as if it may disprove you bro

 

[GRAM4LIFE]

:smh:

 

[JayRob]

You are correct. Nothing scientific intended at all.

So why post it?

 

[JayRob]

Are you ever going to answer the question? Or maybe you should answer Apaquelypse's question about tendencies first. Perhaps that will give me the answer to my question.

The question was answered in succinctly and detailed enough for you to grasp. Up until now, you've provided nothing close to what I've presented except an article based on nothing but a person's personal experience.
If you can't provide any more scientific evidence than I can, please don't demand that I offer more than what I have.

As far as tendencies are concerned, that's based on one's opinion and perception, nevertheless we've seen those kind of tendencies for many men who've chosen to dress like women. Some may attend your church, be in your choir and/or pulpit.

 

[JayRob]

The facts that you state are very misinterpreted. Assiocation does not equal causation (and I know you know this)

Which facts did I misinterpret? Please list them and why they're misinterpreted. If you claim your god inspired a book that's littered with inconsistencies and untruths, then who else should I attribute the blame to?

I disagree. Before there was a man made science there was God.

I know there was Supreme Intelligence before science, but how do you know that the Supreme Intelligence is the god of the bible?

Before man could coin the term violence, the battle between God and Satan was already underway.

How do you know this? Where's the extrabiblical evidence proving that there's a battle between the biblical god and Satan? There's nothing but stories from the bible, but who has ever seen this Satan being that's spoken of in the bible?

Before there could be a "genocide" God had already developed a thing we man later called "creationism".

What does creationism have to do with commanding that whole races of people be killed off? You're making all these statements about your god, but you've yet to explain how you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that your god is the one true god. How do you know that your god is the one true god? I need evidence, not mere comments from a book.

Before there was a race of people to be involved in "racism" there was already God and the Angels occupying Heaven in an ordered civilization.

What does this have to do with racism in the bible having been perpetrated on innocent people? Nothing. Why did your god offer one group of people prominence, but didn't offer other peoples the same opportunities? Instead, he killed them off. He calls himself, "no respecter of persons", but clearly he showed favoritism to one group. How do you explain this?

Before man could plagerize, there was already God's word.

The bible didn't come on the scene until around 1500 BC, so where was his word during that time? The record shows it was nowhere to be found. You've dodged another question by stating something that has nothing to do with the question.

And because you haven't lived long enough, you really can't say a prophecy hasn't been fulfilled, a more accurate statement would be that they aren't fulfilled YET. And please don't go there about history being untrue.

I can emphatically state and show from the bible that many prophecies have never been fulfilled that should've been fulfilled hundreds of years ago. Why do you think they weren't fulfilled? You're good at not answering questions.

The Bible is not a history book, though it does contain parts of history.

If it's not meant to be a history book, why does it bother to list the history of an ancient Israelite people that no one can seem to find much history on? Why do some followers of the bible claim that it's the oldest history book? Either they're mistaken or you are.

And to that I say, the intelligence to develop this "fine tooth comb" is derived from whom again? Please don't tell me that a man, any man, can stand toe to toe with God and outsmart God.

Again, your answer dodges the question again. I understand why you intentionally dodge questions, but this has to be the worse dodging I've seen yet.
If your claim that a Supreme Intelligence wrote the bible is true, the book shouldn't and wouldn't be filled with so many errors and inconsistencies, it just wouldn't. I'll ask again, "why is this"?

 

[JayRob]

That makes a person a homosexual? No sir!!!

Please post where I stated that having female tendencies causes homosexuality. I know my posts are a bit long at times, but they can't be that difficult to comprehend. Now post where I made such a statement.

What that does though is make you sexist!!!

Do you know what sexist means? It's obvious that you don't. Do men have different tendencies than females? Yes. Do women have tendencies that men don't? Yes. Now explain how that's sexist.

The only thing that makes a person a homosexual is.......(drum roll please).....is having sex with the same sex!!!

Did you come up with this on your own? Where does sex begin? According to researchers, it begins in the brain. Even your Jesus figure claims that "sin" begins where? With the act? No. It begins in the heart/mind. Seems like you have a different opinion than your Jesus god.

A man putting on a dress makes him no more a homosexual than a woman in make up a hetrosexual. Do you not realize that some Scottish men wear skirts? That the same mechanism or movement of the bones and muscles that allows both men and women to walk are the same?

Now post where I stated that putting on a dress makes one a homosexual. My words just can't be THAT difficult to comprehend.

Jayrob, your homosexual facts that you use debate have large amounts of holes in them. According to science, both homosexuals and hetrosexuals both have the genetic design to be attracted to others, but also according to this same science, our make up doesn't tell us "who" or "what" to be attracted to. Like there are no genes to be attracted to "sheep" or "red bones" or "big booty b's" or "tall dark and handsomes." Thats a matter of "preference" or in laymans terms "whom one prefers." This same science also does not state that there is a gene imbedded in any of us to have sex, I.e. There is no scientific bodily need for sex. This science also states that the sex organs in and of them selves are for reproduction.

Not one time did you mention perhaps the most important ingredient that determines one's sex. What's that ingredient? It's hormones.
Not one time did you mention how hormones effect the human brain while the fetus is still developing in the womb.
Not one time did you mention how in nature, animals practice homosexuality and some males can be born with female organs.
Not one time did you mention how every human embryo starts out female UNTIL hormones come into play.
Not one time did you mention how some males receive the proper amount of male hormones in his/her brain, while some don't. The same with females. This has been shown to be fact in scientific research.
Not one time did you explain why some homosexual males tend to have female tendencies, while some lesbian females have male tendencies. Instead, you wrongly explained it as being "sexist".

Therefore the organs were predesigned to procreate only, masturbation, casual and homosexual sex are matters of preference and not innate.

Again, you totally ignored the crucial hormonal ingredient which is vitally important in helping to shape the mental and physical makeup of humans before they're born.
As for your claim that organs were predesigned to procreate ONLY, you're agreeing with evolutionists. WOW!!

Now the Christian stance and probably most other religions stance is that male to male or female to female sex is sin because the God of all religions say it's sin.

Prove that your god is the god of all religions.
A religious stance is usually backed by a religious book and nothing else, so I don't put much stock in them.

Your science or its facts or hypothesis' can disprove or reprove God Jay, but urrr it appears as if it may disprove you bro

Facts have shown that the biblical god is man-made, therefore the bible is man-made and merely OPINIONS of men of old who had no knowledge of the biological makeup of the human body. They used what little knowledge they had when the bible was written over time.
Not one writer had a shred of knowledge about the hormonal makeup in males and females. They knew nothing about estrogen, testosterone and other hormones in humans, and animals for that matter.
As a matter of fact, biblical writers thought that babies came ONLY from the male sperm, and that the woman was merely an incubator. They knew NOTHING about the female egg. This shows one how ignorant and backwards they were.
I choose not to put my confidence in such ignorance.

 

[dacontinent]

So why post it?

This is thePrayer Board. It was certainly appropriate for this forum. Sometimes it seems like you approach this as the Science Forum.

 

[dacontinent]

The question was answered in succinctly and detailed enough for you to grasp. Up until now, you've provided nothing close to what I've presented except an article based on nothing but a person's personal experience.
If you can't provide any more scientific evidence than I can, please don't demand that I offer more than what I have.

As far as tendencies are concerned, that's based on one's opinion and perception, nevertheless we've seen those kind of tendencies for many men who've chosen to dress like women. Some may attend your church, be in your choir and/or pulpit.

I don't demand anything of you. I ask you questions, but you are not obligated to me at all.

If you have been succinct, then I missed it entirely. A succinct answer to a binary question has but one syllable. So, I am going to go out on a limb and say that neither of us know of any finding that says homosexuals have any diminished capacity to choose their behavior.