The Bible does not exclude homosexuals as acceptable people.

--- "HE WENT ON TO EXPLAIN THAT JESUS AND PAUL CONDEMNED SEXUAL SIN BUTWHO IS TO SAY THAT HOMOSEXUALITY IS SEXUAL SIN?" Uhhhh.... the Bible... That's what your debate is about, after all. You seem to be equivocating your personal feelings with the statement you've made." + Yes. This is somewhat of a personal deabte, which is not unfair or against any rules. And my debate os about the exact opposite. Your posiotion is that the Bible excludes homosexuals as acceptable people. My position is that it does not. --- "IT IS A NATURAL GENETIC AND SOCIAL OCCURANCE ACCORDING TO MANY LEADING STUDIES AND SOURCES INCLUDING THE AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGY ASSOCIATION." Not that this is relevant to the debate, but I will again point out that this is an appeal to authority and an argument from consensus." + I apologize if I was unclear but this point is simply stating that homosexuality is natural and God-created and God would not force us to be something and then condemn it as he does not. The fact that it is appeal to authority and from consensus is accurate and irrelevant. It is ibviously a fancy way to say that it looks up to a mainstream source and the majority accepts it. Yes. Science is that authority which it appeaks to and the majority conceeds...Please debate instead of making small claims that my points are lesser in some way. Please actually contest what I'm saying. Thank you. --- "YOU MENTIONED MOSES, A CHARACTER OF THE OLD TESTAMENT, NOT THE NEW." When I did I was correcting a misnomer of yours." + ...perhaps I didn't catch the misnomer. I don't believe I questioned the Old Testament or its characters. --- "THIS VERSE SEEMS TO BE CLEAR: PAUL SEES WOMEN HAVING SEX WITH WOMEN AND MEN HAVING SEX WITH MEN, AND HE CONDEMNS THAT PRACTICE." You've now conceded that the Bible does in fact do what you claim it didn't." + This is word play. I say it "seems" like it. As in it does not. I went on to say: But let's go back 2,000 years and try to understand why. Paul is writing this letter to Rome after his missionary tour of the Mediterranean. On his journey Paul had seen great temples built to honor Aphrodite, Diana, and other fertility gods and goddesses of sex and passion instead of the one true God the apostle honors. Apparently, these priests and priestesses engaged in some odd sexual behaviors -- including castrating themselves, carrying on drunken sexual orgies, and even having sex with young temple prostitutes (male and female) -- all to honor the gods of sex and pleasure. The Bible is clear that sexuality is a gift from God. Our Creator celebrates our passion. But the Bible is also clear that when passion gets control of our lives, we're in deep trouble. When we live for pleasure, when we forget that we are God's children and that God has great dreams for our lives, we may end up serving the false gods of sex and passion, just as they did in Paul's time. In our obsession with pleasure, we may even walk away from the God who created us -- and in the process we may cause God to abandon all the great dreams God has for our lives. Did these priests and priestesses get into these behaviors because they were lesbian or gay? I don't think so. Did God abandon them because they were practicing homosexuals? No. Read the text again. ([Homosexual] Reverend Mel White) ...Please stop twisting my words in an unfair effort to win this debate... --- My opponent quotes a Reverend, who he claims is homosexual. + Reverend Mel White is a homosexual reverend. And he's not the only one. "DID THESE PRIESTS AND PRIESTESSES GET INTO THESE BEHAVIORS BECAUSE THEY WERE LESBIAN OR GAY?" First of all, his assertion is baseless and unsubstantiated. Read Romans and there is nothing within it indicating that Paul is referencing pagan rituals." + ? I'm simply saying that God did not abandon these preiests because they were homosexuals but because they were abusive and doing other rituals. Here is the surrounding scripture proving to you that these priests were not abandoned for being homosexual and that God would never do that:21Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. 24Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. 26For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 27And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. 28And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; 29Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, ---"given the fact that he claims he is gay but is also a Christian. He is attempting to reconcile the two because they are at odds -- because his message is disparate to the Bible's message." + It is not at odds. My entire side is proving that. And I have done that! ---" on what grounds do you make your claim?" + The APA agrees that homosexuality is natural. I've stated this. --- If people say the Bible imposes its beliefs on the common man, then how is it any different if the common man imposes his beliefs on the Bible? + I agree. Stop imposing that gays are evil because some six scriptures out of millions vaguely mention homosexuality. Stop using religion to spread hate. --- "you are going to have to substantiate that claim. " + ... I have! "IF SCIENCE IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH PROOF TO YOU THAT HOMOSEXUALITY IS NATURAL..." --- "you really want to do is bash the Bible." + No. I respect the Bible. And I do not believe that the seven scriptures out of millions that mention homosexuality are condemning the practice. I'm simply saying that God made homosexuals and he would not condemn them. As he would not condemn someone for being Asian or tall. --- Do you want to debate Christianity? + No. I am Christian. --- Do you want to debate the Bible? + The interpretaion. Yes. --- Do you want to debate whether homosexuality is (un)natural? + No. I want to debate why God would condenm his mandatory creation. --- I'm getting a little tired of people derailing a topic! + Then don't do it. --- There are six scriptures that condemn homosexuality in the Bible. = (1) GENESIS 2:21-25 = Adam and Eve, not Steve. Adam and Eve is a tale for all people. Adam and Eve had to have excluded other peoples too. Are they immoral and unnatural? No. They are not. Adam and Eve are for all of us. = (2) GENESIS 19:1-14 = Sodom and Gamora was not destroyed because of homosexuality. There were heterosexuals there. They were destroyed for arrogance as Ezekiel 16:48-49 says. = (3) LEVITICUS 18:22 AND 20:13 = This was a holy code for Israeli priests not for the average person. A holiness code is for a certain people at a certain time. It also includes tatoo bands and round haircuts. = (4) ROMANS 1:26-27 = These priests were abandoned for reasons other than homosexuality. = (5) (6) 1 CORINTHIANS 6:9 AND 1 TIMOTHY 1:10 = Says homosexuality is abomination but there is no word for gay in Greek or Hebrew. It is a huge translation error. This is a great source for further reading:soulforce.org