I can not stay with your line of thought and I think it is far more supportive of a "design apart from one's self" viewpoint, even though your position is that these life preferences do not pertain to genetics.
We make choices all along our lives concerning what we will consider, study, inquire about , explore, experiment in, advance or reject.
Take your basketball example; I lived the first 37 years of life with almost a complete repulsion to watching NBA players run up and down a court and shoot into a metal ring. Then a friend of mine, who was well-versed in the coaches, strategies, back-stories, and player skills shared much of this with me and I was OPENED up to a place where I could enjoy watching the sport be played. I would tend to believe that there was some worthwhile or valid experiences, or maybe a good surrounding or a needed escape, that led you to appreciate fishing.
If we look to the childhood experience (often preceeding readily available memories), and consider that some development got derailed because of trauma, neglect, rejection, embrassement, etc we find a need to acknowledge a series of subsequent actions (choices) that have subsequently been solidified and reaffirmed by a lifestyle.
Events that were very real, leaving in their wake, distortions of one's personal self. If the giftings within God's body ministry are not functioning in this area, then there is no remedy apart from a person's private experience with calling upon the name of Jesus for a transformation by being able to receive a new 'mindedness'.
We have countless examples of this being vainly attempted with many other manifestations of sin's bondage (resentment, bitterness, lascivousness) . If a sincere attempt to get free is not found in their private world, what remedy will they find if they come to you, me, or any other member of the body of Christ?
I agree that my examples of hobbies were weak considering they have nothing to do with relationships, but I believe they still have merit into the conversation when one considers the overall point, and that being that we all have 'attractions' in our life and that some aren't necessarily a choice, but a preference.
I'll give you a wonderful example. I don't like macaroni and cheese. I detest the stuff. Not because I haven't tried it, because I have, but when I was young, a traumatic thing happened that turned me off forever.
Let me first say that children's taste in foods change as they age. This isn't genetic, nor is it a choice, but it happens for us all in one way or another. I didn't eat broccoli or shrimp until I was in my late teens, for instance.
Anyway, my mom was a parent that believed in us trying something once, but if we didn't like it, she didn't force us to eat it. We had several meals with both mac and cheese and corn....my brother liked the former but to this day won't eat the latter.
There was a lady who babysat us often and her oldest daughter and I were best friends for years. However, she couldn't stand me (most adults couldn't) and she was quite mean (however, we are great friends today....I consider her my adopted mom).
She made dinner one day and mac and cheese was part of the meal. Well, I informed her (I think I was 9) that I didn't eat that nasty stuff, so a spoonful was put on my plate.
I ate everything but the mac and cheese, but being raised in an era where your plate was cleaned, they were upset, and another spoonful was put on my plate. I couldn't leave until I ate it.
Well, I protested and each time, another spoonful was put on my plate. An hour and a half later, I had a large plate of this nasty stuff to eat. There was no mercy.
So, not having any other choice.....I picked up my spoon. I remember not even chewing, just putting it in and swallowing it quick. I was gagging the entire time, but there was no way I was vomited because I had no doubt that they would make me eat it again!!
This was also the days before microwaves, so it was cold. I still remember that taste and feeling as I type this out. It's funny now, but it was traumatic at the time.
My adopted parents and I laugh about it now, and they admitted they were wrong for doing that, and couldn't imagine doing that to their grandchildren, but the damage was done all the same. I have never done that to my children either.
Anyway, things that happen in our childhood affect us in our adult lives, and this includes relationships with others, whether it's friends, authority, family, or lovers.
__________________
I've gone and done it now! I'm on Facebook!!!
I skimmed this letter defending homosexuality and just quite stunned at the brazen nature of it all. Not surprised that the twisted could twist so well.
Homosexuality is a deviant act... often that is thrust upon children by molesters. They are "bent" this way, not because of birth, but because of abuse and / or deep spirtual problems.
If abuse is the cause, the result should be noticed for what it is ... perversion.
I looked at the website... and the pics of all the happy "gay" smiles enough to make one sick.
This is why it's so important to separate the underlying unnatural/abnormal attraction (which is not chosen) from the sin (the choice of embracing and acting on the attraction) and deal with each separately. Yes, the underlying attraction is contrary to God's created design for male and female but, no, it isn't chosen. Regardless, it's still sin to embrace and act on the attraction.
I agree. Another problem or question left undefined yet, what does it mean to be "natural".
How does one define what is natural for humans and what is un-natural? Should we not get back to what the bible says? I keep noticing that in this discussion both parties keep moving away from what the bible says to statistics, philosophical arguments and genetics....none of which can or have proven a thing here
I agree. Another problem or question left undefined yet, what does it mean to be "natural".
How does one define what is natural for humans and what is un-natural? Should we not get back to what the bible says? I keep noticing that in this discussion both parties keep moving away from what the bible says to statistics, philosophical arguments and genetics....none of which can or have proven a thing here
Natural is that which is according to God's created design prior to it being corrupted as a result of Adam's sin.
Puberty onset isn't a genetic predetermination either. It's hormonal, not genetic. Major difference.
Are you saying hormones are not genetic? Certainly I am misunderstanding you. Everything about our anatomic and physiological make up is rooted in our genes.
Are you saying hormones are not genetic? Certainly I am misunderstanding you. Everything about our anatomic and physiological make up is rooted in our genes.
Is it? Are you saying you can prove there is a specific "puberty gene"?
Again, you have a big problem. You are making claims as fact when there is no proof. I cannot have honest discussion based on that.
Attraction to people isn't genetic. It's a development over time that has occured, just like other things you enjoy.
For instance, I like to fish. I didn't make that choice one day, but it stems from experiences and other things that happened when I was younger.
I like to watch Nascar and football. I didn't make that decision one day, but it's something that attracts me to those activities.
I HATE baseball and basketball. I couldn't watch those games if I tried. Oh, and I've tried. I lived in the Chicago area when the Bulls won their first three-season winning streak. I just couldn't get into it. No appeal to me whatsoever.
However, NONE of the above is based on genetics. It's just how I am. I don't know why I prefer football to baseball, but that's how it is.
This is how you are with your attractions also, but you can't base it on genetics when the research says otherwise.
Again, these arguments of yours are flawed. You're comparing apples to oranges. An attraction to a sport (a man-made game) cannot be compared to a sexual and emotional attraction to another human being (God-made being) because NOBODY has a "natural" attraction to any sport, food, color, etc. However, humans DO have a natural attraction to other human beings. Generally, men have a natural attraction to women and, generally, women have a natural attraction to men. What group of people are born with a natural attraction to a sport and is that sport incompatible with an attraction to the "opposite sport." Your comparing my attraction to men with an attraction to football. Would you compare YOUR attraction to men/women in the same way?
Is it? Are you saying you can prove there is a specific "puberty gene"?
Certainly you have enough understanding of human genetics (including the epigenetic system) to understand that some genes are "activated" at birth and others are activated later on in life. This doesn't make their existence any less natural or genetic.
Secretion of GnRH is what activates the production of the hormones that regulate puberty. Though it is secreted at different times for different people (sometimes based on genetic interactions with the environment) it is, nonetheless, a natural and genetically influenced process.
If puberty is not genetically influenced, then may I ask for your explanation for it?
I agree. Another problem or question left undefined yet, what does it mean to be "natural".
How does one define what is natural for humans and what is un-natural? Should we not get back to what the bible says? I keep noticing that in this discussion both parties keep moving away from what the bible says to statistics, philosophical arguments and genetics....none of which can or have proven a thing here
I love and respect the Bible but it is NOT a scientific book. A true and honest study of God's creation can also reveal Divine Truths. Look at the history of the Church regarding Galileo's scientific theory that the sun was stationary. The Church used Scripture to claim his teachings as heresy and, as a result of his beliefs, was imprisoned by the Church.
It was later proven, scientifically, that his theories were in fact true. It wasn't until 1992 (some 350 years after his death) that the Church offered an apology for their actions against Galileo.
I love and respect the Bible but it is NOT a scientific book. A true and honest study of God's creation can also reveal Divine Truths. Look at the history of the Church regarding Galileo's scientific theory that the sun was stationary. The Church used Scripture to claim his teachings as heresy and, as a result of his beliefs, was imprisoned by the Church.
It was later proven, scientifically, that his theories were in fact true. It wasn't until 1992 (some 350 years after his death) that the Church offered an apology for their actions against Galileo.
Let's not be too quick to discount science.
I never said the bible is our science book.....sigh
If you all want to start a thread on science and genetics, go for it. But whether or not homosexuality is "ok" or a sin is NOT going to be found in ANY science book based on science or genetics, nor has there been any proof found by science that validates homosexuality
Linear Mode
