From: adams@spss.com (Steve Adams)
Subject: Re: Homosexuality and Christianity
Date: 16 Apr 92 19:29:40 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: SPSS Inc.

hudson@athena.cs.uga.edu (Paul Hudson Jr) writes:

>In article <adams.703368767@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
>>As such, and being that homosexuality is no more controllable than
>>heterosexuality, a homosexual having relations with a woman would actually
>>be un-natural, given their default choice of partner.

>In the passage of Romans, God delivers those who become homosexuals up
>to uncleaness.
To a Gentile, the concept of 'uncleaness' doesn't exist...

>These unnatural lusts come about as a result of disobedience.
The sin then is disobedience...

>God did create Adam as a murderer, so murder is not a "natural" act for
>a man to commit.
I take it you mean 'did not.'  God created everything, and as such, is the
creator of all things, good and evil.  Murder could not exist without God's
permission.  He created man *capable* of murder.

>John said that the one who hates his brother is a murderer.  Little children
>can hate.  Do we say that hate is natural an not sinful because it appears
>early on in life?  Of course not.  Hate occurs because sin entered the world.  It is another of sin's corrupting
Hah.  Hate is learned.  Homosexuality is not.  It is innate and inherant.
You no more chose to be heterosexual (nor did I) than anyone choses to be
homosexual.  It is not learned.  Hate *is* learned.

>Why should we treat the disobedient desire to or orientation toward
>homosexual sodomy any different than the desire or orientation toward murder?
Because the 'orientation' is not towards sodomy.  It is towards romantic
love for men.  Can't you understand this?  Just as being heterosexual does
not imply that you have sex (you can be celibate), neither does being
homosexual imply that you have sex.

And for that matter, what about anal or oral sex between husband and wife.
I don't see any particular preclusions against these things.

>>There certainly is a complaint against lust and fornication.  And against
>>indecent acts.  But what would be indecent for a heterosexual male is
>>certainly most natural and normal for a homosexual one.

>The only reason it could be considered "natural" is because God has allowed
>a lust which is against nature to come upon the individual.  But God
>is in the business of changing people, and their natures.

I disagree with God being in the business of changing people and their
natures.  We change in response to God and the Spirit, but God no more
'changes' me than I can change Mt. McKinley.  He may provide me with grace
to understand why I am wrong, but I only change when I stop saying 'No' to
God.  Why would God want worship from people who had no free will to
refuse?

As for homosexuals, you must compare them with heterosexuals.  What is
natural for heterosexuals is unnatural for homosexuals and vice-versa.
They are both innate traints, well inside our physiologcal and mental selves
that we can no more change than we can move the sun from it's path.

Why would a loving, omnipotent God create a being who could not gain
salvation?

 -Steve
--
 The opinions expressed above are those of the author and not SPSS, Inc.
                        -------------------
     adams@spss.com                           Phone: (312) 329-3522
     Steve Adams                              Fax:   (312) 329-3558
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc