It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Define Christianity as Hate - The New Homosexual Agenda

page: 27
55
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 12:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Believer101
 



So now me asking a legitimate question as to when you woke up and chose to be heterosexual is a "silly game"?


Don't you wish they would actually challenge their minds with this question? They so rarely entertain it


I sometimes muse over the idea. Like someone keeps a daily journal and one day out of the blue they write "today I decided to be a heterosexual". A week later they write in "I have decided to be a heterosexual for another week".
edit on 9-8-2012 by Lucid Lunacy because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 12:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy

Originally posted by Agoyahtah
Christians have it already, there is a special term, "gay union" for the bond between two men.


The continual omission of lesbians is quite telling.


Its become fairly norm to use gay as all-encompassing in representing all LGBTQ.

No one bothered to ask the LGBTQ what they think about it.

Kind of the same in the hetero world too - - - not to specifically include women.


edit on 9-8-2012 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 12:42 AM
link   
Christianity is defined by Jesus. Jesus vigorously preached LOVE and vehemently opposed HATE.

It is mankind who has distorted and perverted the teachings of Jesus Christ.

This is no surprise because mankind is fallen and corrupt.

The fact that man is fallen and corrupt is nothing new. The fact that the "Homosexual Agenda" may be depicting Chrisianity as a religion built on hate should not surprise anyone. Christians have to remember Ephesians 6:12 which says, "For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms."

It is not against men we battle. IT is against darkness we battle. IT is the darkness which led men to stumble into sin.

Is because of the sin of mankind that Jesus came in the first place. Since ALL men sin, Jesus paid the penalty for the sin of ALL men. Even Christian-hating homosexuals are as deserving as of the FREE Gift of Salvation as the moral law abiding Christians.

Jesus paid the price for our sins because ALL men sin. And ALL men fall short of the Glory of God.

The Homosexual Agenda can HATE Christians all they want. They can portray Christian however they want. If God gives all men free will, they are exercising thaeir God given free will.

I say, for those of us who are Christians, when anyone stands up to claim Christianity is a religion built on HATE then we should prove them wrong by showing them MORE LOVE.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 12:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
If the louder of the Christians weren't as hatefull, maybe you would not have this problem.

Every action as an equal and opposite reaction. The Christian Community ( the leaders of I mean not the general population) have been VERY hatefull towards homosexuals in the last 30 years.

This is simply the result of that hate.

You reap what you sow and if you as a Christian don't feel like you belong to such a group, then you need to stand up and declare that to people and attempt to make a difference in your community.

As long as Christians allow bigots to represent them, then you will find that other groups of people who disagree will attempt to call all of you bigots.

~Tenth


Can you name any group that doesn't have bigots? It's your job to see past the bigots and look at what said group of people is really about.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 12:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by something wicked
*snip*

Interesting responses, thanks. Let's face it though, at the time of Christ marriage was 'just' between a man and a woman, it was the common thing - not mentioning same sex marriage isn't the same as being against it and again, being against same sex marriage is not the same thing as being against homosexuality. Personally neither are of any interest to me whatsoever, people are what they are and I wouldn't judge anyone based on whatever their sexual preference - as long as it's legal.

Still not sure that the references to Sodom are explicitly around homosexuality though - I thought it was more around general debauchery that may have been both mixed and same sex and all sorts of other things that the Jewish religeous leaders were miffed about (possibly jealous? Who knows).


Thanks. I did actually locate some more verses for you.

Matthew 19:4-6 - And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

Here, Jesus speaks clearly of what marriage is intended to be. He is speaking of divorce in this case, but the fact that He describes marriage as the joining of a man and woman cannot be ignored.

For those that wish to ignore the OT, and pretend that Jesus didn't agree with those writings, we have His own words on that issue:

John 5:46-47 - For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

Those writings speak very clearly about homosexuality, and call it a sin. In another place, Jesus speaks of the sins of the times of Lot:

Luke 17:28-30 - Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all. Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.

If it isn't clear what was meant, you can see what He means in this passage:

Luke 1:7-8 - Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.

In Matthew 10:15, and 11:24, and also in Mark 6:11, He again speaks of the times of Sodom and Gomorrah. There He is speaking of places that reject Him, and how it will be worse for them than for those cities.

As for Him being God, here are just a couple of places that show this to be true:

Matthew 1:23 - Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. John 1:1 - In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. John 1:14 - And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

So, hope this helps clarify why I believe as I do on this issue. It isn't about judgment. It's about seeing a sin, and trying to warn people. Same as I would do, and have done, regarding other sins. We ALL sin, in some ways or others. The key is to be forgiven, and for that, we have to acknowledge the sin, and ask. That's about love, not hate.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 12:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by stormson

this idea often leads to the idea that "gay" is a genetic defect. its not. its no more a defect than being left handed. a defect harms the individual biologically. being gay does not. matter of fact, it could be a mutation, much like drinking the milk of other animals, that is beneficial in the long run as it limits the amount of offspring we can produce in a natural world (a hypothosis that i thought of but have no numbers to back up). or simply a change, like between left and right handedness that happens for no reason whatsoever.



I always say we are ALL mutations from the original human.

We all have differences.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 12:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
reply to post by Believer101
 



So now me asking a legitimate question as to when you woke up and chose to be heterosexual is a "silly game"?


Don't you wish they would actually challenge their minds with this question? They so rarely entertain it


I sometimes muse over the idea. Like someone keeps a daily journal and one day out of the blue they write "today I decided to be a heterosexual". A week later they write in "I have decided to be a heterosexual for another week".
edit on 9-8-2012 by Lucid Lunacy because: (no reason given)


Oh you have no idea how much I would love to get a legitimate answer when I ask that question. I never woke up one morning and decided to be omnisexual, I was just automatically attracted to both sexes. (I know with my attitude in this thread it's hard to tell I'm actually bisexual, but whatevs.)
edit on 9/8/2012 by Believer101 because: silly typing mistake.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 12:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by wittgenstein
*snip*
???? Again you take 2 positions that oppose each other. That proves that your position is self-contradictory and therefore invalid. Below I will take each of your points individually and refute them.

“Was that supposed to make sense?”
LadyGreenEyes
I really do not see what is hard to understand.

“... the pro-gay side thinks Christians should have no freedom of speech or religion."
LadyGreenEyes
How is voicing one’s opinion infringing on your opponent’s freedom of speech. I think you are confusing “hate speech” with “hate crime”. If I say that what you say is filled with hate I am not saying that it should be illegal for you to say a particular thing.

“No, I stated that calling a statement of a religious belief "hate speech" is a violation of the free speech of said pastors”
LadyGreenEyes
???? that makes no sense. If you are consistent, then you labeling my beliefs as hate filled (“Anti-Christian haters…” LadyGreenEyes ) is an example of you denying my freedom of speech. That is absurd! When two people disagree and debate each other, they are not asking for their opponent’s freedom of speech to be suppressed.

“Anti-Christian haters have no call to say anyone is an "antichrist", either. rather hard to call people wrong for their beliefs, and then label them as something based on those beliefs.”
LadyGreenEyes
So therefore, a fundamentalist pastor cannot call a Unitarian, Quaker, or Gnostic wrong. Also, I am not anti-Christian. I am against fundamentalists that worship an image of Christ that is the opposite (anti) of Christ and his message

edit on 8-8-2012 by wittgenstein because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-8-2012 by wittgenstein because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-8-2012 by wittgenstein because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-8-2012 by wittgenstein because: (no reason given)


You are missing the point, yet again. What wasn't clear was the wording. What you are missing is that many want to label Christian teachings as "hate speech", and also call "hate speech" illegal, and an "infringement" on the rights of others. Just as (like I already pointed out) they have done in Canada. I think you understand quite well what I am saying.

Nope, HUGE difference in people that study the Bible having disagreements over various points, and people that call it a "fable" also calling Christians the "antichrist".

Logic fallacy there.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 12:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy
 


no worries. i am extremely cold and uncaring for the most part.

i was trying to make a joke, but with such an emotional issue i should have known it wouldnt go over well.

however, pendantics aside, i do believe that the children of gay couples are their children, just like adoptive parents.

there is more to the world than pendantic language and definitions, theres the spirit of the thing that is much greater.

gay marriage to me is just like straight marriage. two people love one another and want to join forces to "conquer the world". its simple. two people. (that really is the only reason i oppose polygamous marriage, it gets too complicated with 3 or more people). however, i was in kuwait and iraq where you could have up to four wives and they were ok (for the most part).

i guess it all comes down to yourself. i could never think of having more than one wife. (she told me to type that, j/k) for others its fine. i just really dont care what other people do so long as it doesnt effect me.

thats why i feel for gay marriage. i can identify with wanting to marry, but not being able to and that would hurt.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 12:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Believer101

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes

Originally posted by wiser3

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes

Interesting, too, that some are still pushing the "gay gene" angle, when everyone knows there is no such thing, and all the studies point to environmental and mental factors.



If everyone "knows" please list your sources for where you "FOUND" this knowledge!


How about virtually anywhere that offers the scientific studies? NO ONE with any scientific knowledge claims that there is such a gene. They spent over a decade looking, and never located one. Do the research. This isn't a secret.


Hmm, I thought he asked for sources for your knowledge, not just you saying stuff again.
Why should WE be the one's to do the research? Why can't you post the links to something we obviously don't know about?

BTW, since you've been gone, I'll ask you my questions again:

I have a question for you, then. If you say there is no "gay gene" and it's a choice, when did you wake up and say "I'm going to be attracted to the opposite sex"? When did you choose to be attracted to the opposite sex? Did you choose it or did it just happen?


I am not doing the research for you. How about you show ANY proof that there is such a gene? Why should you do the research? because you are the one that wants the information. I already know, and have looked at that issue for a couple of decades now. Do your own studying.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 12:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 



Its become fairly norm to use gay as all-encompassing in representing all LGBTQ.

For sure. I use the term gay when referring to lesbians too. I wasn't addressing the 'gay union' but the part where he equated that to a bond between two men. He later also said referenced it as man to man. It's just my opinion that this often/sometimes is indicative of a phobia towards gay men and not homosexuality as a whole.

It's just so common.

I mean anti-gay religious will post passages that could only be interpreted as being relevant to men and therefor not apply to gay women. Their minds do not get hung up on this. Strange.

They almost always mention men in all the arguments. When they talk about how unnatural gay sex is... it's two men. Etc etc. Maybe I am taking too much out of this pattern.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 12:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Believer101

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes

Originally posted by Believer101

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
Interesting, too, that some are still pushing the "gay gene" angle, when everyone knows there is no such thing, and all the studies point to environmental and mental factors.


I have a question for you, then. If you say there is no "gay gene" and it's a choice, when did you wake up and say "I'm going to be attracted to the opposite sex"? When did you choose to be attracted to the opposite sex? Did you choose it or did it just happen?
edit on 8/8/2012 by Believer101 because: typo


Nope, not playing the silly game. Homosexual behavior is a mental issue, brought on by environmental factors. Trying to claim that someone has to "decide" not to have such an issue is a foolish tact.


So now me asking a legitimate question as to when you woke up and chose to be heterosexual is a "silly game"? How so, exactly? I'm genuinely curious as to your answer. When did you wake up and choose to be straight?
edit on 9/8/2012 by Believer101 because: (no reason given)


Again, not playing the game of pretending that people without a mental disorder somehow "woke up" one day and decided not to have one. Yes, it's a game, and this is the last response you will see from me on that issue.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 12:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes

Originally posted by Believer101

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes

Originally posted by Believer101

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
Interesting, too, that some are still pushing the "gay gene" angle, when everyone knows there is no such thing, and all the studies point to environmental and mental factors.


I have a question for you, then. If you say there is no "gay gene" and it's a choice, when did you wake up and say "I'm going to be attracted to the opposite sex"? When did you choose to be attracted to the opposite sex? Did you choose it or did it just happen?
edit on 8/8/2012 by Believer101 because: typo


Nope, not playing the silly game. Homosexual behavior is a mental issue, brought on by environmental factors. Trying to claim that someone has to "decide" not to have such an issue is a foolish tact.


So now me asking a legitimate question as to when you woke up and chose to be heterosexual is a "silly game"? How so, exactly? I'm genuinely curious as to your answer. When did you wake up and choose to be straight?
edit on 9/8/2012 by Believer101 because: (no reason given)


Again, not playing the game of pretending that people without a mental disorder somehow "woke up" one day and decided not to have one. Yes, it's a game, and this is the last response you will see from me on that issue.


So now being attracted to the same sex is having a mental disorder?!?!!
I definitely know how you work now. I'm done with this conversation with you.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 12:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by MuonSpin
Christianity is defined by Jesus. Jesus vigorously preached LOVE and vehemently opposed HATE.

It is mankind who has distorted and perverted the teachings of Jesus Christ.

This is no surprise because mankind is fallen and corrupt.

The fact that man is fallen and corrupt is nothing new. The fact that the "Homosexual Agenda" may be depicting Chrisianity as a religion built on hate should not surprise anyone. Christians have to remember Ephesians 6:12 which says, "For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms."

It is not against men we battle. IT is against darkness we battle. IT is the darkness which led men to stumble into sin.

Is because of the sin of mankind that Jesus came in the first place. Since ALL men sin, Jesus paid the penalty for the sin of ALL men. Even Christian-hating homosexuals are as deserving as of the FREE Gift of Salvation as the moral law abiding Christians.

Jesus paid the price for our sins because ALL men sin. And ALL men fall short of the Glory of God.

The Homosexual Agenda can HATE Christians all they want. They can portray Christian however they want. If God gives all men free will, they are exercising thaeir God given free will.

I say, for those of us who are Christians, when anyone stands up to claim Christianity is a religion built on HATE then we should prove them wrong by showing them MORE LOVE.


you have completely missed the point of the passage you quoted! all of it was written for the individual! it is for you, not you and your friends to gang up on others.

you dont want to be gay married, then dont. resist your gay attraction.

to stop others from living their lives in love, support, and more importantly political equality, is hateful.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 01:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by stormson
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


the "gay gene" issue is one i take to heart.

they have not found a gene for right/left handedness, yet we acknowledge it exists as an inborn trait dictated by genetic code.

not to mention that multiple genes are often times needed to create an outcome. if so much as one is out of whack, a different outcome results.

this idea often leads to the idea that "gay" is a genetic defect. its not. its no more a defect than being left handed. a defect harms the individual biologically. being gay does not. matter of fact, it could be a mutation, much like drinking the milk of other animals, that is beneficial in the long run as it limits the amount of offspring we can produce in a natural world (a hypothosis that i thought of but have no numbers to back up). or simply a change, like between left and right handedness that happens for no reason whatsoever.



The thing is, it isn't genetic. They know handedness is hereditary. Yes, that is proven. They have proven that being a morning or night person is genetic. They have shown that many, many things are genetic, yet there is not one shred of evidence for a genetic factor in homosexuality. It is environmental. I have looked at portions of studies, from both sides, that show this to be a fact. I have known people that were homosexual that stated the same thing. They didn't have a political agenda, and were simply talking to a friend. I have to mention that one of these friends left that behavior behind. She was into it because of (HER words, not mine) a very abusive relationship. She ended up with another woman, but later left that behind, married a great man she loves dearly, and stated that she was messed up mentally for awhile. No, she didn't become involved in any of the programs for that. This was HER decision.

Defect? No, but a mental issue, that can be changed. People aren't defective because they are depressed, or bipolar, etc. They are simply human beings that aren't perfect (like all of us).

Plus, all of the long years of study never found any genetic connection. They looked. One simply doesn't seem to be there. Besides which, God stated that the behavior is a sin, and He doesn't call condemn people for there genes.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 01:06 AM
link   
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 



They have shown that many, many things are genetic, yet there is not one shred of evidence for a genetic factor in homosexuality


I specifically argue homosexuals don't make the conscious choice for their orientation because I don't want to limit the argument to genetics specifically.

The only thing we can be certain of is the lack of choice, that's not necessarily equated to being 'born that way' as we don't fully understand the subconscious. That said, I think it's most reasonable to think people are born with their orientations.

As for the instances where people enter a relationship with one gender and then one with another. You look at that as a period of mental illness. However they could be bisexual. That is also an explanation.
edit on 9-8-2012 by Lucid Lunacy because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 01:10 AM
link   
reply to post by sensible1
 


I'd rather the world be run by homos than Christian zealots any day of the week. At least homos are generally pretty peaceful and don't run around telling me I'm wrong and that I'm going to burn in hell for not being gay. No... I don't have a problem with homosexuals, what they do with themselves is as much of my business as what I do with myself is yours. They have my blessing to continue doing whatever the f#ck it is they do. Christians on the other hand... I'm pretty fed up with the self-righteous behaviour and I'm sure God is too. Just live and let live: take a break for a while and let him do the smiting. He's getting pretty frustrated since you bastards took away his only job. I know this because he told me
No, really! I read it in a book!



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 01:11 AM
link   
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


LOL! Good answer! As all your post have been. I wish I had your eloquence.
I have read reports on this "gay gene" research. The info is out there, if one cares to look.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 01:12 AM
link   
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


"They know handedness is hereditary. Yes, that is proven. They have proven that being a morning or night person is genetic. They have shown that many, many things are genetic, yet there is not one shred of evidence for a genetic factor in homosexuality."

how was it proven? where is the genetic link? where is the right/left hand gene? its not a great leap of logic to the idea that something as important as sexual preference is controled by the genetic code is something as simple as right/left handedness is.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 01:14 AM
link   
I think this image fits in with this discussion very very well.





top topics



 
55
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join