The Instigator
KJVPrewrather
Pro (for)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
ByronSpear
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points

Does the Bible support marriage equality.

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The Voting Period Ends In
138days10hours48minutes17seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/5/2017 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 month ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 239 times Debate No: 105544
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (3)

 

KJVPrewrather

Pro

I say yes, Con says no. Con will make the first move.
ByronSpear

Con

In this debate I will be basing my arguments off of one item - The inerrancy of Scripture. When Scripture says something, it is God speaking and is 100 percent correct 100 percent of the time. I cannot argue this subject without being granted this point. Basically, my main point is that the Bible, God's holy, inerrant words, states that homosexuality, which refers to all types of gay, lesbian, bisexual etc... is an abomination in his sight. Leviticus 20:13 states that "If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them." This argument is plain and clear and not open to different interpretations. Committing gay acts is an abomination. Romans 1 says "Therefore God gave them up in the desires of their hearts to impurity for the dishonoring of their bodies with one another."They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator, who is forever worthy of praise! Amen. For this reason God gave them over to dishonorable passions. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. Likewise, the men abandoned natural relations with women and burned with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error. For this reason God gave them over to dishonorable passions. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. Likewise, the men abandoned natural relations with women and burned with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error." In this passage homosexuality, both gay and lesbian, is called dishonorable, unnatural, indecent, and are punished for their sin. God will not support dishonorable, unnatural, indecent acts. Nor does he punish those He supports. For these reasons I cannot believe that God accepts marriage equality. Once again, thanks to KJVPrewrather for this great topic. I am looking forward to an intelligent, civil debate!
Debate Round No. 1
ByronSpear

Con

To start the second round, I will revisit my points and look at my opponent's points as well. So my opponent failed to address every point I made, that the Bible comes straight out (no pun intended) and states that homosexuality is an abomination and is dishonorable, unnatural, and indecent. These points are in my favor as of right now. To look at my opponents argument, I first want to ask a couple questions. Is posting links of other people making other arguments fair? I do not know, I have never seen this before. But from what I can tell, it goes over the character count and is not your own work. Regardless of that, I will address all of the points that gaychristian101.com made. For the first article on David and Jonathan, the author does not understand the relationship as it is. The Hebrew word for love as my opponent means is agape. That word never appears in those passages, and the relationship they form in a deep friendship and political pact. The article does not prove that it is a homosexual relationship, just states that it cannot be proved otherwise. This is not an argument for his side, and is not a winning one. For Sodom and Gomorrah, I did not quote that passage, and that is a straw-man fallacy, setting my argument into a easier one to defeat and attacking that. Please stick to the points that I made, or make your own, do not attack points that I did not make. The same goes for the Adam and Eve passage, the Leviticus passage, the 1 Corinthians passage, the Arsenokoitai passage, and the Leviticus passage. for the gay centurion, all the article says is a possibility of the centurion being gay, a one out of two chance. Since Scripture is always to be understood in context of other similar passages when looking at a difficult topic, this centurion cannot be gay because Jesus blesses him, and he would address that issue if it was there. But once again, that article does not establish the centurion as gay, merely allows for that possibility. Since the burden of proof is on the Con's side, and there is no proof, that point should go to Pro also. If you could , update me on using links in arguments and if that is good to support your argument of even make it. I would love to know.
Debate Round No. 2
KJVPrewrather

Pro

Where is your evidence. You have not posted KJV Scriptures or links to any articles. May I conclude that you have none?
ByronSpear

Con

Here is my evidence, as previously stated in my very first argument. I will put it in the KJV if you do not like the ESV. Leviticus 20:13 "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." Romans 1 " For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And 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 recompense of their error which was meet." Both of these passages are my evidence, they are in my first argument. I do not understand why you do not think that I have evidence. I also am allowed to do my own arguing and not solely rely on other's work. For these reasons, you may not conclude that I have no evidence. So my points that I have now made in my first and third posting have gone unaddressed while my opponent has mainly attacked arguments that I did not make. These points go to me and I again state that you should make arguments based on what I have written. If you ignore that, we are not having an actual debate.
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2 1 month ago
BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2
Con wins by default!
Posted by SlowDMO 1 month ago
SlowDMO
What horribly biased voting... I can't vote yet, but con wins, hands down.
Posted by ByronSpear 1 month ago
ByronSpear
Thanks VoteForPedro419 for your great support and understanding. rennerpetey, I do not wish death on people who break the sabbath, gays, adulterers, or people who divorce their spouse. I wish them to come to know their errors, of which I have many also, and to know and love the Lord Jesus Christ and to begin to grow in sanctification.
Posted by rennerpetey 1 month ago
rennerpetey
Exodus 35:2 "2 Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you an holy day, a sabbath of rest to the Lord: whosoever doeth work therein shall be put to death."

What about this verse, there are millions of people who work on the sabbath, and if you take a literal translation of the bible, then you believe that people who work on sundays should die.
Posted by VoteForPedro419 1 month ago
VoteForPedro419
As a Christian, I am called to love unconditionally. In response to rennerpetey, wishing death upon homosexuals is not at all what ByronSpear is suggesting, merely that it isn't a morally correct practice. Sodom and Gomorrah was an example in the Old Testament of judgement coming to those who deliberately go against God and don't ask for forgiveness, and I don't think something exactly like that will happen again. In addition, wishing death upon homosexuals is the same as me damning them to hell. Christians are called to teach others about the saving grace of Jesus Christ, not to deliberately cause them endless pain and suffering. If one believes that we, as humans, were intelligently designed by Yahweh as I do, we should strive to do His will. He designed men and women differently for a reason: to be compatible for one another. To go against this divine design simply for sexual gratification or self-indulgence is selfish and rebellious. Speaking on the topic of divorce brought up by rennerpetey, the Bible doesn't rule out divorce in all instances (in instances of marital unfaithfulness, divorce is allowed).
Posted by rennerpetey 1 month ago
rennerpetey
so, you think all gay people should die? What about women who divorce their husbands, or people who commit adultery? should they die too?
Posted by missmedic 1 month ago
missmedic
Not when you have to change your name to your husband's.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Outplayz 4 weeks ago
Outplayz
KJVPrewratherByronSpearTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con sums it up perfectly in the last round... with his sources, especially Romans 1. Pro didn't argue any point nor provide any sources against what con provides.
Vote Placed by BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2 1 month ago
BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2
KJVPrewratherByronSpearTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Con by default!
Vote Placed by Throwback 1 month ago
Throwback
KJVPrewratherByronSpearTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: My position on the topic was unchanged by the debate. Both displayed good conduct. While Pro used a greater number of sources, among them were sources narrowly focused on and with an agenda specifically promoting homosexuality and are not objective.