The Instigator
DrBobe
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
gordonjames
Con (against)
Winning
11 Points

Homosexuality is a sin, according to the Bible

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
gordonjames
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/20/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,705 times Debate No: 33928
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (16)
Votes (2)

 

DrBobe

Pro

Rules: No swearing, bad attitudes, ect. Just a friendly debate, have fun:)
gordonjames

Con

Homosexuality is a sin, according to the Bible

I want to thank PRO for posting his challenge. I look forward to the debate. I expect PRO and I agree on many issues including my belief that homosexual SEX is condemned in the Bible. I disagree with PRO"s position as the word homosexuality generally refers to more than just the act of homosexual sex.

By way of definition lets use any English translation of the 66 books included in the Protestant canonized scriptures. Lets avoid paraphrases of the Bible.

Lets define sin more narrowly for this debate as anything explicitly prohibited by God or explicitly called an offense or abomination to God.

I think this definition of homosexual is a good place to start.
- http://www.merriam-webster.com...

Definition of HOMOSEXUAL
1 : of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex
2 : of, relating to, or involving sexual intercourse between persons of the same sex

I will be stressing that the any act of sex outside of a male female marriage is specifically forbidden in scripture. Homosexual temptations (orientation) are not a sin in themselves.

Blessings in the debate.
Debate Round No. 1
DrBobe

Pro

Thank you CON for replying and accepting this challenge,
It does clearly state in the Bible in 1Corinthians 6:9 "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! The sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, passive homosexual partners, practicing homosexuals, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, the verbally abusive, and swindlers will not inherit the kingdom of God"

And also more clearly stated in Lev. 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."

More references to this can be found here:
http://carm.org...
gordonjames

Con

Thanks to PRO for his opening thoughts and great reference.

The definition of homosexuality used (and not challenged above) has two parts.
The first part refers to SEXUAL DESIRE FOR THE SAME SEX.
The second part refers to sexual intercourse or what I will refer to as SEXUAL ACTIONS.

I agree with PRO that sexual actions with a same sex partner are forbidden. This is only a part of his claim. Pro is claiming that ACTIONS and DESIRE are both sin. PRO is clearly mistaken

DESIRE for sexual fulfilment with a same sex partner is a temptation, not a sin.

Desire or Temptation is not a sin.
Matthew 4:1 - Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil.
Mark 1:12-13 - The Spirit immediately drove him out into the wilderness. And he was in the wilderness forty days, being tempted by Satan.
Luke 4:1-2 - And Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan and was led by the Spirit in the wilderness for forty days, being tempted by the devil.
Hebrews 4:15 - For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.

In James 1:14-15 we read about the progression from DESIRE to ACTION.
14 But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. 15 Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death.

DESIRE (a constant in our lives) leads to temptation as opportunity presents itself.
DESIRE + opportunity gives us the choice of how we ACT.
If we give in and ACT on those wicked temptations we SIN.
If this is not clear, look at the context (James 1:12-13) which says a man is blessed if he resists the temptation. When he has stood the test he receives the crown of life.

12 Blessed is the man who remains steadfast under trial, for when he has stood the test he will receive the crown of life, which God has promised to those who love him. 13 Let no one say when he is tempted, "I am being tempted by God," for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one.

The first list of verses quoted in the CARM reference point to the ACTIONS as sinful, not the DESIRE. (Otherwise temptation itself would be a sin)

Lev. 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."1
Lev. 20:13, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them"
Rom. 1:26-28, "For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. 28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper."

These are all about ACTIONS.

One reference need further examination.
1 Cor. 6:9-10, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

Fornicators - ACTION - Definition of FORNICATE - to commit fornication
Idolaters - ACTION - Definition of IDOLATER - a worshiper of idols
Adulterers - ACTION - Definition of ADULTERER - a person who commits adultery;
Thieves - ACTION - Definition of THIEF - one that steals

There are two non action words in this English list - effeminate, and homosexuals
Lets check if other translations than the one quoted in CARM shed any light on this

The ESV calls them "nor men who practice homosexuality" - ACTION
The HCSB calls them " anyone practicing homosexuality" - ACTION
this comes with the footnote
- 1 Corinthians 6:9 Lit adulterers, passive homosexual partners, active homosexual partners
The CEV renders it this way - "or is a pervert or behaves like a homosexual" - ACTION
The LEB is most clear on this - " nor passive homosexual partners, nor dominant homosexual partners", and again it is about action.

The definition of homosexuality used (and not challenged above) has two parts.
The first part refers to SEXUAL DESIRE FOR THE SAME SEX.
The second part refers to sexual intercourse or what I will refer to as SEXUAL ACTIONS.

PRO is clearly mistaken to call both DESIRE and ACTION SIN.
Homosexual desire, as a life long orientation or an occasional impulse is a temptation to be mastered. James 1:12 teaches us "Blessed is the man who remains steadfast under trial, for when he has stood the test he will receive the crown of life, which God has promised to those who love him"

Fighting the temptation is not a sin, but a challenge that brings blessing.
Debate Round No. 2
DrBobe

Pro

DrBobe forfeited this round.
gordonjames

Con

Since pro did not post to round 3, I will simply summarize his and my argument.

Definitions
Homosexuality -
1. Sexual attraction or desire for the same sex
2. Sexual intercourse or sexual contact with the same sex
Sin -
Any offense to God or His standard
Bible -
The 66 books of the protestant Christian Scriptures

PRO claims that "Homosexuality is a sin, according to the Bible"

I agree with his claim that homosexual actions are forbidden in scripture.

I refute his claim (According to the definition above) that the attraction and temptations to sin are sin in themselves.

I have a temptation to gluttony - it is only sin when I give in.
I have a temptation to dishonesty - it is only sin when I give in.
If I have temptations to sex outside God's boundaries - it is only sin when I give in.

I want to state in the strongest terms that temptation is not sin.
Judgment comes the choices we make.

Homosexual temptation is no more a sin than temptation to gossip, slander, steal, lie, or any other temptation.
It is our choices and actions that define us.

I am disappointed that PRO did not show up for round 3.
It would have been fun to hear his position.
Debate Round No. 3
16 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by GWL-CPA 3 years ago
GWL-CPA
Part I

DrBobe opened this debate with "Homosexuality is a sin, according to the Bible."

This debate was not about the meaning of the word homosexuality? That was your invention. So you post a definition that includes "characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex. Then you state "Homosexual temptations (orientation) are not a sin in themselves."

But, again, that was not DrBobe stated this debate was about. It is obvious from the title of this debate that DrBobe was talking about the act. But, I will show verses in the Bible that talk about temptation and impure thought being the same as the act, and are a sin.

DrBobe then posted his proof from the Bible:

It does clearly state in the Bible in 1Corinthians 6:9 "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! The sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, passive homosexual partners, practicing homosexuals, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, the verbally abusive, and swindlers will not inherit the kingdom of God"

And, also more clearly stated in Lev. 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."

More references to this can be found here: http://carm.org...

On that alone, DrBobe wins this debate.

But, you could not win this debate against that proof; so you had to change the debate to include homosexual desires and temptations, which DrBobe never mentioned. That is dishonest as Hades!
Posted by GWL-CPA 3 years ago
GWL-CPA
Part II

He probably decided that was all he needed to win the debate; he did not think someone would be as devious as you to change the debate. You were supposed to present arguments, not change the debate.

Even though I am an atheist, I also know the Bible backwards and forward and have studied and debated that superstitious nonsense for over 40 years, including in College. And, impure thought and desires are implied to be sins in the Bible.

Matthew 5:28 ESV / "But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart."

Romans 8:7 "For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot."

He could have used those verses to prove that God believes that thinking impure thoughts or impure desires are a sin according to God.

But, that was not what the debate was about. He probably did not think that anyone would be as devious as you have been. Even your friend voter philochristos states:

"Sorry, gordonjames, I didn't see your comment. I don't have a whole lot to say about the content. Pro's resolution was that "homosexuality is a sin, according to the Bible." He didn't define homosexuality, so you defined it in your acceptance by making a distinction between homosexual actions and homosexual desires, saying that actions were sinful according to the Bible, but not desires. You seemed to interpret Pro as saying that homosexual desires are also sinful even though Pro didn't specify what he meant."

You are just playing with words; but, you also changed the debate to what you wanted.

He won this debate on his arguments because he stayed on topic.
Posted by GWL-CPA 3 years ago
GWL-CPA
Part III

Then somehow you voted for yourself and gave DrBobe no points; you are a phony egotist. I did not see a big difference in his spelling and grammar when compared to yours, so why did you not vote tied in that category? You said you agreed with him before the date, but you gave yourself the checkmark, even though there are no points for that. How is that possible, even if he did not present arguments in Round 2? I don"t think there is any requirement to present argument in each round.

Then one of your friends votes for you; but philochristos question your need to add temptation and desire to your definition of homosexuality. You are way too funny.

You are one big phony egotist. What does your God say about that?
Posted by philochristos 3 years ago
philochristos
Sorry, gordonjames, I didn't see your comment. I don't have a whole lot to say about the content. Pro's resolution was that "homosexuality is a sin, according to the Bible." He didn't define homosexuality, so you defined it in your acceptance by making a distinction between homosexual actions and homosexual desires, saying that actions were sinful according to the Bible, but not desires. You seemed to interpret Pro as saying that homosexual desires are also sinful even though Pro didn't specify what he meant.

And then, strangely enough, Pro didn't say anything about your distinction in his opening. He neither agreed with it nor objected to it. I interpreted that as implicitly agreeing with the distinction and agreeing to argue that homosexual desires are sinful, not just the actions.

But then he made no argument to that effect. He argued that "homosexuality" was a sin, but didn't argue whether Paul was talking about actions, desires, or both. So this just struck me as being non-responsive.

You made some pretty good arguments showing that while the actions are sinful, the desires are not. At that point, Pro forfeited, leaving all of your arguments without any response.

That's pretty much all I have to say about it.
Posted by CarminPolitano 3 years ago
CarminPolitano
-- DrBobe -- Where'd you go? Covet covet. You're going to loose because you won't try. Temptation is to be refused -- not just the action, but the temptation itself. Covet. Look it up. Perform a bible search. Everything you need is in the dictionary and the bible -- especially in the new testament for its general purpose references.
Posted by gordonjames 3 years ago
gordonjames
philochristos - I would love to hear your thoughts on the content of the debate.
Posted by KaelanArgues 3 years ago
KaelanArgues
Ok, thanks for clearing that up for me.
Posted by AntieChrist 3 years ago
AntieChrist
maaaayn thiz ig a weeeeel gud dabat
Posted by CarminPolitano 3 years ago
CarminPolitano
-- KaelanArgues -- Two different fabrics meaning wool and linen (linen/wool defined difference between priest/person; the Canaanites mixed them) ... two different seeds meaning no hybrid (the seed of a hybrid is non-productive).
Posted by CarminPolitano 3 years ago
CarminPolitano
Consider a bible search "not covet". Consider the definition of Covet. All sins begin with the thought of committing a sin. If a sinful thought is not felt to be a sin, then sinful thought is free to multiply until temptation can no longer be contained. Pro has no chance.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by gordonjames 3 years ago
gordonjames
DrBobegordonjamesTied
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: I wish PRO had presented more of an argument in round 2. I wish pro had shown up in round 3
Vote Placed by philochristos 3 years ago
philochristos
DrBobegordonjamesTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeited, but even without the forfeit, Con would win.