Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's the way it was back in the 70s and 80s. In modern AZ, I have observed that the far left LGBTQ has grown in huge size outnumbering older, moderately conservative middle-aged Christians in the family. The latter is the one being ostracized now with "lack of acceptance". The young generation is (in many cases) no longer religious - the "nones" are those who do not identify with any religion. They are very large in cohort strength - so the rejection of moderately conservative Christians of middle-age in the family has turned the tables. Nowadays, the middle aged Christian is often being outcast by the far left LGBTQ even though we disagree with Fred Phelps and find the Matthew Shepard murder unacceptable. To the far left LGBTQ it's not good enough at all. It seems like you have to be gay like them to be accepted. It's ridiculous. The conservative Christian lifestyle of the 70s and 80s back in the Reagan Era is long gone among a lot of the young people. To be fair, the young people are not all like that, but the pattern I described definitely exists here in AZ.
As for Louisiana, I know it is heavily Catholic or Protestant. Conversion therapy seems unrealistic. The far left LGBTQ would villify it immediately and turn it into a political castigation with legislative support. So, it's probably not really advertised or officially condoned. The Catholic Nuns who taught me had a central convent originating in East TX near Louisiana. It used to be conservative out there, but I doubt the young people are largely like that anymore.
Realistically, from personal experience, the far left LGBTQ want "conversion" therapy on middle-aged moderately conservative Christians in the family to "throw their religious values out" and become like them - far left LGBTQ. Go figure. When it gets that extreme, the demand for "acceptance" seems kind of hypocritical and counter-intuitive to "Freedom of Religion".
You have a very interesting perspective. I think it is nonsense, and I think the "conservative Christian lifestyle of the 70s and 80s" never actually existed. The Sexual Revolution decimated the legacy of the Holiness movement. Outside of certain smaller religious corners like Orthodox Judaism or Mormonism, sexual practices tend to mirror secular society at large. The evangelical Christians are, and always have been, the biggest liars of everybody.
LGBT people aren't interested in converting anybody. They just want to be able to participate in public life with the respect and protections that every American should enjoy.
Any Biblical based church offers gay conversion to an extent. As homosexuality is still a sin according to both the Old and New Testament. Paul, who is the greatest Christian to ever live, explains it so clearly there's no doubt about the sin. Now before your retort is to not judge, I will respond that I am not judging, and I am a sinner. However I acknowledge my sin and confess it.
Have a great day!
JD
To the above post ...poppycock! NOWHERE in the Old or the New Testaments is 'homosexuality' mentioned. Prior to the year 1946, no manuscripts - including the King James Bible - existed that contained the term 'homosexuality'. You won't find that word in the KJV. Moreover, for those who might say, "Ah, but ..." ...NO equivalent term for 'homosexuality' existed - not in Hebrew - not in Aramaic - not in Greek. It was not until 1946 that some authors determined that certain ambiguous words and recorded events MUST mean 'homosexuality'. And so they erroneously included the word 'homosexuality' in their Bibles. Since most Christians are little more than sponges who simply soak up what is being preached by the man in the pulpit they blindly believe that "God" condemns homosexuality. Perhaps "God" or Paul MAY have had an ax to grind with homosexuality. HOWEVER, we don't get this from the Bible because it simply does not address homosexuality.
Hands up who didn't know this information before now? Don't bother with the hands. I already know. VERY FEW Christians know this because they don't take the time to do serious research but would rather listen to the same regurgitated stuff from the guy in the pulpit who doesn't know what he's talking about either on this particular subject ...and, maybe other subjects too. These 'modern' Bibles containing the word 'homosexuality' are corrupt and are, in fact, potentially dangerous since they may well drive simple minded people to doing some pretty stupid things as we have seen from time to time.
Fact. It's only in recent times that modern medical science has come to at least some understanding of human sexuality. So, don't think for one moment that the ancient authors of the Bible could possibly have had any inkling of what 'homosexuality' actually was ...even if they did witness it within their own tribes. The ONLY references to same sex practices in the Bible (and even then only in less than a half-dozen places in the ENTIRE Bible!) are aimed toward pagan idolatry involving sexual rituals with temple prostitutes in acts of worship to appease the idols. If you don't or didn't know this, JeffDavis, then you should do the right thing and disqualify yourself from this discussion.
So, the next time you - a general you - hear a Christian say that 'the Bible condemns homosexuality', then call them a liar or an ignoramus ...or both. You will be well within your rights because that is what they are.
You are not serious, I presume. I'm name one verse off of the top of my head:
"For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; nd the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. - Romans 1:26-27
However the context begins in verse 18 and goes to the end of the end of the chapter. Paul mentions elsewhere where they are condemned. The Old Testament provides very detailed commentary on it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RomulusXXV
To the above post ...poppycock! NOWHERE in the Old or the New Testaments is 'homosexuality' mentioned. Prior to the year 1946, no manuscripts - including the King James Bible - existed that contained the term 'homosexuality'. You won't find that word in the KJV. Moreover, for those who might say, "Ah, but ..." ...NO equivalent term for 'homosexuality' existed - not in Hebrew - not in Aramaic - not in Greek. It was not until 1946 that some authors determined that certain ambiguous words and recorded events MUST mean 'homosexuality'. And so they erroneously included the word 'homosexuality' in their Bibles. Since most Christians are little more than sponges who simply soak up what is being preached by the man in the pulpit they blindly believe that "God" condemns homosexuality. Perhaps "God" or Paul MAY have had an ax to grind with homosexuality. HOWEVER, we don't get this from the Bible because it simply does not address homosexuality.
Hands up who didn't know this information before now? Don't bother with the hands. I already know. VERY FEW Christians know this because they don't take the time to do serious research but would rather listen to the same regurgitated stuff from the guy in the pulpit who doesn't know what he's talking about either on this particular subject ...and, maybe other subjects too. These 'modern' Bibles containing the word 'homosexuality' are corrupt and are, in fact, potentially dangerous since they may well drive simple minded people to doing some pretty stupid things as we have seen from time to time.
Fact. It's only in recent times that modern medical science has come to at least some understanding of human sexuality. So, don't think for one moment that the ancient authors of the Bible could possibly have had any inkling of what 'homosexuality' actually was ...even if they did witness it within their own tribes. The ONLY references to same sex practices in the Bible (and even then only in less than a half-dozen places in the ENTIRE Bible!) are aimed toward pagan idolatry involving sexual rituals with temple prostitutes in acts of worship to appease the idols. If you don't or didn't know this, JeffDavis, then you should do the right thing and disqualify yourself from this discussion.
So, the next time you - a general you - hear a Christian say that 'the Bible condemns homosexuality', then call them a liar or an ignoramus ...or both. You will be well within your rights because that is what they are.
To the above post ...poppycock! NOWHERE in the Old or the New Testaments is 'homosexuality' mentioned. Prior to the year 1946, no manuscripts - including the King James Bible - existed that contained the term 'homosexuality'. You won't find that word in the KJV. Moreover, for those who might say, "Ah, but ..." ...NO equivalent term for 'homosexuality' existed - not in Hebrew - not in Aramaic - not in Greek. It was not until 1946 that some authors determined that certain ambiguous words and recorded events MUST mean 'homosexuality'. And so they erroneously included the word 'homosexuality' in their Bibles. Since most Christians are little more than sponges who simply soak up what is being preached by the man in the pulpit they blindly believe that "God" condemns homosexuality. Perhaps "God" or Paul MAY have had an ax to grind with homosexuality. HOWEVER, we don't get this from the Bible because it simply does not address homosexuality.
Hands up who didn't know this information before now? Don't bother with the hands. I already know. VERY FEW Christians know this because they don't take the time to do serious research but would rather listen to the same regurgitated stuff from the guy in the pulpit who doesn't know what he's talking about either on this particular subject ...and, maybe other subjects too. These 'modern' Bibles containing the word 'homosexuality' are corrupt and are, in fact, potentially dangerous since they may well drive simple minded people to doing some pretty stupid things as we have seen from time to time.
Fact. It's only in recent times that modern medical science has come to at least some understanding of human sexuality. So, don't think for one moment that the ancient authors of the Bible could possibly have had any inkling of what 'homosexuality' actually was ...even if they did witness it within their own tribes. The ONLY references to same sex practices in the Bible (and even then only in less than a half-dozen places in the ENTIRE Bible!) are aimed toward pagan idolatry involving sexual rituals with temple prostitutes in acts of worship to appease the idols. If you don't or didn't know this, JeffDavis, then you should do the right thing and disqualify yourself from this discussion.
So, the next time you - a general you - hear a Christian say that 'the Bible condemns homosexuality', then call them a liar or an ignoramus ...or both. You will be well within your rights because that is what they are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDavisCSA
You are not serious, I presume. I'm name one verse off of the top of my head:
"For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; nd the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. - Romans 1:26-27
However the context begins in verse 18 and goes to the end of the end of the chapter. Paul mentions elsewhere where they are condemned. The Old Testament provides very detailed commentary on it.
Yep, I'm absolutely serious. But, you are correct that the context of the passage of scripture begins at verse 18. HOWEVER, that you don't understand the context of that scripture since you do know where it begins is rather baffling. All one has to do is to READ.
Paul is addressing either what he personally witnessed going on within the Church of Rome or/and the pagan temples in the area or, alternatively, what others had reported to Paul in letter form. We're only getting one side of the picture. Whatever, these were not only PUBLIC events being referenced but also events of a religious nature, i.e. practices pertaining to idol worship. The Romans 1 passage speaks of 'those who once knew God' (i.e. former 'early Christians') who had now given up on God and had instead turned to the worship of man-made idols made in the likeness of mortal man, birds, animals and reptiles.
Once again ...Paul is addressing IDOL WORSHIP that also included sexual dalliances or 'rituals' between the 'worshipers' and male temple prostitutes who were considered 'sacred' within religious pagan circles. For those who might be interested, do some online or local library research on ancient shrine temple prostitutes and as to why they were used within religious pagan settings. Yes, male/male sex was apparently involved, and perhaps also female variants of sexual rituals, but whether or not either the male prostitutes (referred to as 'sodomites' in the Old Testament) or their 'clients' were homosexual or heterosexual was IRRELEVANT. Worship dedicated to the idols in order to appease them for supernatural favors was the object of the practice ...certainly not sexual intimacy per se.
Anyway, the above description is at the crux of Romans 1:18-27.
One more very important item is that Paul was not God and had no more authority than any of us today to condemn anyone ...even if he HAD been addressing 'homosexuality per se', which he was not. So many today equate Paul as being the divine mouth-piece of God which is tantamount to biblical blasphemy. Paul was a mere mortal and, to his credit, he even tells us this. It's not his doing that others have elevated him to the status of Jesus.
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: xneither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. - 1 Corinthians 6: 9-10
You cannot take this verse and thr entire Bible out of context.
Let's take a step back into reality. My point was that many people have been converted back to straight.
I doubt it. My guess is "many" of those people consciously "CHOOSE" to live a straight life and not act upon their same-sex feelings/attractions, unless they are on the "down-low" and have something going on in both worlds.
I don't think a person can change his or her sexual feelings/attractions. They can change their behavior, but not what's true in their heart.
I was wondering if anyone could speak to whether any BR area churches offer gay conversion therapy (to attempt to change an individual's sexual orientation), because I have heard rumors that some do.
I hope not. People can not change their sexuality. Watch the movie "Boy Erased" - might wake you up. Good portrait of the ugliness that ensues when people try that nonsense.
I may not agree with it, but a church can do what it wants. Even in those places where the practice is banned in the US, its only banned as it applies to children. If adults want to waste their time and money, I say let them.
I doubt it. My guess is "many" of those people consciously "CHOOSE" to live a straight life and not act upon their same-sex feelings/attractions, unless they are on the "down-low" and have something going on in both worlds.
I don't think a person can change his or her sexual feelings/attractions. They can change their behavior, but not what's true in their heart.
All of them are just lying and suppressing their sexuality to satisfy a sky man that doesn't exist and their delusional families.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
