The Instigator
Jesusfreak012095
Pro (for)
Losing
11 Points
The Contender
johngriswald
Con (against)
Winning
39 Points

Homosexuality: a sin to Christians

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 11 votes the winner is...
johngriswald
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/22/2009 Category: Religion
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 4,027 times Debate No: 10545
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (41)
Votes (11)

 

Jesusfreak012095

Pro

I have challenged johngriswald to a debate on the topic of, Is Homosexuality a sin in a Christians eyes?
My Opening statement includes this: 1 Corinthians 6:9 (New International Version)

9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders.
1 Corinthians was a letter to the city of Corinth, which in most cases is like today's society. Women dressing inappropriately, men paying prostitutes for sex, etc.
Yes the Bible says "Love your neighbor as yourself." "Love one another as I have loved you." Those passages weren't saying go off and marry them. Jesus used the word love in the form of show kindness, love them like a brother, NOT go and marry them. The Bible was originally written in Hebrew.
Understanding the concepts that are invested in words can aid us in our own lives. As an interesting example, the word "love" which is thrown about so freely in English, has a special meaning in Hebrew. Love in Hebrew is "Ahava" , which is made up of three basic Hebrew letters, . These three letters actually are broken down into two parts: a two letter base or root, , and the first letter, , which is a modifier. The meaning of the two letter base, , is "to give". The letter "aleph" , which precedes these two letters comes to modify the meaning of the base word, "give". The meaning of , is "I give" and also "love".

Aome words got cut out because they were in Hebrew, so go to this site to see the whole paragraph.
http://www.jewishmag.com...
johngriswald

Con

===> Introduction <===

I would like to thank my opponent for this debate.

===> Definitions <===

For clarity I would like to pose the following definitions:

sin - Deliberate disobedience to the known will of God.
God - The holy trinity, meaning God, Jesus, Holy Spirit.

===> Argument of Contention <===

My opponent fails to recognize who wrote Corinthians 6:9 or who it was too.

It was a letter written by Paul to the church of Corinth. Paul obviously isn't God. The following was also written in the same letter:

1 Corinthians 7:1 "Now for the matters you wrote about: It is good for a man not to marry."

1 Corinthians 7: 8 Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I am. 9 But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.

1 Corinthians 7:10 To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. 11But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife.

You'll notice that Peter is not God. When he does give directions from God in Corinthians 7:10 he says "not I, but the Lord" Which is different from Corinthians 7:8 when he uses the words "I say". If he would have given a command from God in Corinthians 6:9 Paul would have stated that this was a message from God and not himself, which he does not do.

Paul himself acknowledges that he is not God by his differentiation in addressing the people of Corinth. Since only God can determine sin, my opponent's contention is thoroughly negated.

However if there was any doubt we can rely upon Jesus's words:

Matthew 22:36-40 (New International Version)

36"Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" 37Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.'[a] 38This is the first and greatest commandment. 39And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'[b] 40All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."

Clearly the supposed law against homosexuality hangs on neither of these two commandments. Therefore homosexuality is not a sin.

===> Conclusion <===

To conclude: Paul is not God. Only God can determine sin. Jesus abolished old testament law that does not hang upon his two great commandments. The supposed law against homosexuality supports neither of these two commandments, thus it is not a law nor a sin.

Contention Negated.

I would like to thank my opponent for this debate and wish him luck in the next round.
Debate Round No. 1
Jesusfreak012095

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent for accepting this debate.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
I didn't feel like I would have to state who wrote Corinthians, since, I figured you would know who wrote it since you have accepted this argument, I figured you would know.
When Jesus said to "Love your neighbor as yourself" and "Love each other as I have loved you." He wasn't using it the way our culture just throws it around as I pointed out in the first round.
If you went to the site I added in the first round, you would know exactly what I am talking about.
Paul wrote 1&2 Corinthians to the Church of Corinth, as you said. He knew they they would not think he was God so he didn't feel the need to point that out before every thing he said.
If God did not want it in the Bible He would not put it in Paul's heart through the Holy Spirit, for every part of the Bible is inspired by the Holy Spirit.
johngriswald

Con

===> Introduction <==

I would like to thank my opponent for his argument

===> Negation <===

"for every part of the Bible is inspired by the Holy Spirit."

Is my opponent seriously contending that every word of the Bible is the word of God? This is certainly not so as Christians do not believe the following:

Deuteronomy 22:11 "Thou shalt not wear a garment of divers sorts, as of woollen and linen together."

Furthermore are the words that Judas speaks inspired by God? He was an apostle. Why would Paul say (Not I but the Lord) in one instance if his entire letter was inspired by the lord?

One could argue that pastors are also inspired by the holy spirit, but are their words equivalent to the word of God? Do pastors have the power to create sin?

Point: The Apostles themselves are allowed to have opinions and not every word they speak was inspired by God or meant as a direct commandment from God. My opponent has failed to address my point about Paul saying that it is good not to marry. Yet do we view marriage as a sin?

===> Conclusion <===

My opponent has not argued any new contentions he only gives one sentence to support his original contention when he says "for every part of the Bible is inspired by the Holy Spirit." This idea has clearly been negated. Furthermore my opponent provides no logical nor scriptual proof to back his own claim that every single word in the Bible is a direct commandment from God. He fails to address my point about Jesus's two commandments, furthermore he fails to address my point about Paul's opinion of not marrying. Additionally he gives no real dismissal of my proof of Paul saying "I say" and "Not I but the Lord".

My opponent's contention has thoroughly been negated, he has failed to address most of my arguments and produces no scriptural proof backing his latest claim that every word is divinely inspired and thus is the direct commandment of God. Despite my opponent not having any proof I have thoroughly negated his new point through simple logic.
Debate Round No. 2
Jesusfreak012095

Pro

My opponent keeps pointing out that Paul said it is good not to marry.
Who brought that up. The fact that it can be good not to marry and to marry has nothing to do with homosexuality. Just because he says it is good not to marry, doesn't mean that homosexuality is ok. I don't see where you can pull that into this argument. We do not view marriage as a sin, for no where in the Bible does it say it is.
The sentence that states that the Bible was inspired by God, was in fact, not my only sentence to argue this point.
2 Timothy 3:16-17 (New International Version)
All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.
2 Peter 1:20-21 (New International Version)
Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.
You can not find anything in those to passages that will prove my point of the Bible being inspired wrong.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
I would like thank my opponent for his argument
johngriswald

Con

===> Introduction <===
My opponent brings up completely new information in the last round which is largely regarded as bad form a my opponent cannot offer any response to my rebuttals.

He fails to address my point about Jesus's two commandments, furthermore he fails to address my point about Paul's opinion of not marrying and merely questions why it was brought up. Additionally he gives no real dismissal of my proof of Paul saying "I say" and "Not I but the Lord".

===> Argument <===

My opponent obviously does not regard marriage as a sin, but yet by his ridiculous contention that every word of scripture is divinely inspired. Marriage is a sin. Wearing polyester is a sin. The words that Judas speaks flow from the holy spirit.

"We do not view marriage as a sin, for no where in the Bible does it say it is."

My opponent is basically making the following argument:

Paul says to not be homosexual in his letter to Corinth
All words in the bible are from God
Therefore since Paul is against homosexuality, God is against homosexuality, therefore it is a sin.

Applying the same logic.
Paul says not to marry in his letter to Corinth.
All words in t bible are from God.
Therefore since Paul is against marriage, God is against marriage, therefore it is a sin.

However my opponent states that marriage is not a sin, therefore contradiction, and his by his own statement his logic that every word is God inspired is broken.

There is a difference between being inspired and being the direct command and judgement of God. My opponent's two verses to back up his claim fail. Both state that all scripture is inspired by God and is profitable for teaching. With this statement I agree. However in neither of these statements does it say that all scriptures is a direct commandment of God. Furthermore Paul is not a prophet nor did he claim to be.

===> Conclusion <===

I have refuted my opponent's own point by using his logic against him and by applying similar "sins" to his "sin test" and by my opponent's own acknowledgment(marriage is not a sin) he has failed. My opponent's has ignored several of my claims even though he had ample space to contest them in the character limit. His affirmation has been refuted and he has not proven his affirmation. His weak conjecture that every word in the bible no matter who it comes from is a judgement of what is and isn't sin has been struck down by me by using my opponent's own opinion and logic. It is for these reasons that I ask all to vote Con.
Debate Round No. 3
41 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Galiban 7 years ago
Galiban
@skeptic
Ad Nauseum = an argument that has been argued to the point of boredom/sickness/nausea.
Posted by humanistheart 7 years ago
humanistheart
Was that a response? If so, what are you trying to convey?
Posted by johngriswald 7 years ago
johngriswald
lol i read that wrong nvm.

"jesus did not fullfill one single messianic prophicy. He was not, in any way, a messiah."
ad nauseam.
Posted by johngriswald 7 years ago
johngriswald
humanisheart = 10/10
Posted by humanistheart 7 years ago
humanistheart
"@TheSkeptic Jesus fulfilled mosaic law when he died on the cross. Most of the Old Testament was a collection of Jewish laws and customs. Jesus clarified this when he stated that all commandments of God hung on love."

John, one cannot fullfill a law. That's not how law works. You may be thinking of prophicy, but the simple matter is jesus did not fullfill one single messianic prophicy. He was not, in any way, a messiah.
Posted by Galiban 7 years ago
Galiban
@TheSkeptic
To Clarify concisely. The Old Testament contained prophecies concerning a NEW convenant with Zion (the Church).
Isaiah 59-60 summarized in this verses
Isa 59:20-21
20 "The Redeemer will come to Zion,
to those in Jacob who repent of their sins,"
declares the LORD.
21 "As for me, this is my covenant with them," says the LORD. "My Spirit, who is on you, and my words that I have put in your mouth will not depart from your mouth, or from the mouths of your children, or from the mouths of their descendants from this time on and forever," says the LORD.
NIV

This shows that redemption and salvation discussed only comes through repentence. The promise is then to have the Spirit of God. Salvation comes no other way.

The words in the "Mouth" of those that receive the redemption described in these chapters is God's Law. The "actions" of the Law were done away with (the rituals and ceremonies). Christ never did away with the INTENT behind all of the laws. He came and instilled a New law, a new way of "acting out that Law".

Gal 6:1-2
1If anyone of your brothers is found to sin, try to restore him.....2 Carry each other's burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ.
NIV

I use this verse to show that conceptually in the Bible there is indeed a "New Law"

Basically
***the law did not go away only the Actions did.***
Matt 5:18 "For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled."
****There is a new way to fullfil it.****
Carry one another's burdens and Love the Lord your God with everything and Love others as yourself. If you followed all of the actions in the Old Testament you would have been fullfilling exactly these things. We just have a different way of doing that.
***You are under the Law if you keep on sinning but if you stop sinning and repent you are under/Get the Grace of God.***
1 John 3:9 Right with God = No Sin.
Posted by johngriswald 7 years ago
johngriswald
@TheSkeptic Jesus fulfilled mosaic law when he died on the cross. Most of the Old Testament was a collection of Jewish laws and customs. Jesus clarified this when he stated that all commandments of God hung on love.
Posted by TheSkeptic 7 years ago
TheSkeptic
I know daniel, my comment wasn't meant as a criticism - just a sincere question.
Posted by InquireTruth 7 years ago
InquireTruth
Moreover, even if the assumption were true, Jesus was not a sinner given that the NIV Bible specifically states in Hebrews that he was not.
Posted by InquireTruth 7 years ago
InquireTruth
I'm denying that the NIV is synonymous with the Bible and necessarily true in the particulars. I'll stick with the my Greek and Hebrew.
11 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by ricky78 7 years ago
ricky78
Jesusfreak012095johngriswaldTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by Jesusfreak012095 7 years ago
Jesusfreak012095
Jesusfreak012095johngriswaldTied
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:70 
Vote Placed by Danielle 7 years ago
Danielle
Jesusfreak012095johngriswaldTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Vote Placed by daniel_t 7 years ago
daniel_t
Jesusfreak012095johngriswaldTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Vi_Veri 7 years ago
Vi_Veri
Jesusfreak012095johngriswaldTied
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 
Vote Placed by Protagoras 7 years ago
Protagoras
Jesusfreak012095johngriswaldTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by twsurber 7 years ago
twsurber
Jesusfreak012095johngriswaldTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Vote Placed by Korashk 7 years ago
Korashk
Jesusfreak012095johngriswaldTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:04 
Vote Placed by Thade 7 years ago
Thade
Jesusfreak012095johngriswaldTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by popculturepooka 7 years ago
popculturepooka
Jesusfreak012095johngriswaldTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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