Two types of intentions

Unveiled artist

Unveiled artist

Real life Dolls
Messages
125
Reaction score
62
Points
28
I know of quite a few Christians who say that for example murder committed because of mental health illness is excused of gods punishment whereas those murderers who killed with full knowledge and ill intent suffer from their sins.

In this case its the intent that determines how God sees the sinner not the action itself regardless of mindset and/or age.

Why doesn't the same logic apply to homosexuality (defining this by the bible only)?

The intent of sex between two men or women in a committed relationship is not of lust just as the intent of someone who murders another but have a mental health condition that caused it doesn't harm by purposeful intent.

If one can get off because the intent wasn't purposeful aggression why can't the other get off because the intent isn't lust?

I'm comparing homosexual actions and murder to make a point since it's seen in the same regards according to scripture.

The intentions are not sinful in both cases, why not both be treated in the same regards?
 
Last edited:
Unveiled artist said:
comparing homosexual actions and murder to make a point since it's seen in the same regards according to scripture
Click to expand...
This gets debated regularly.

My interpretation of the outcome is that folks that are homophobic see what they want in Scripture (well so do I...and most I believe) but when you wanna talk about intent...

Now we know Jesus had little, I mean no comments on homosexuality....even though we know it occurred during his time. The only references are old testament and if you speak to rabbis and scholars their interpretation of the passages and of the intent of the passages differs from that of a anti-gay preachers rhetoric.

This debate (to me) has been worked over...and the majority have moved on.....but the vocal zealous minority viewpoint is still shouted from the soap box.
 
wil said:
This gets debated regularly.

My interpretation of the outcome is that folks that are homophobic see what they want in Scripture (well so do I...and most I believe) but when you wanna talk about intent...

Now we know Jesus had little, I mean no comments on homosexuality....even though we know it occurred during his time. The only references are old testament and if you speak to rabbis and scholars their interpretation of the passages and of the intent of the passages differs from that of a anti-gay preachers rhetoric.

This debate (to me) has been worked over...and the majority have moved on.....but the vocal zealous minority viewpoint is still shouted from the soap box.
Click to expand...

They usually talk about homosexuality being a sin is the main idea. However, that aside, though, if one sin is excused by intentions why not others?

If we tossed homosexuality out.
 
RabbiO said:
Not in my scriptures.
Click to expand...

If homosexuality is a sin (actions) it's comparable to other abominations. But the question has more to do with one set of sins being excused by intentions and other sins are not. I mostly speak with Christians so I'm not sure if Jews (broadly speaking) think homosexuality is an action, temptation,or orientation. But in this context of the OP (is that used here?) it's an action.
 
IMO many sins are tribal necessities, to maintain the strength of the tribe, but do not apply outside it. So it's not ok to murder or steal from a member of my own tribe, but ok to do it to someone from another tribe. Tribal marriage and adultery laws are there to prevent inbreeding and spread of sexual transmitted diseases.

The seven deadly sins however are sins that affect the sinner more than they affect others: Lust Gluttony Greed Sloth Wrath Envy Pride ...
 
A person from another tribe isn't really a person. It's the parable of the good Samaritan
 
My Christianity is debatable. I'm Non-Nicene and don't regard the Old Testament as canon to my faith.

However, Jesus taught asceticism. For this reason, Paul and Peter promoted celibacy, not homophobia. Both heterosexuality and homosexuality are condemned, pretty much equally.

Personally, I do practice religious celibacy. The reason for this is two-fold;

Firstly. Romantic partnerships are extremely time consuming and this is time that could be better spent doing good works. Romantic "downs" can especially interfere with how well you are helping others and the pursuit of a romantic partnership can easily detract and distract from pursuing the greater good.

Secondly, Sexual stimulation is addictive. If you go long enough without sexual stimulation, including auto-stimulation, then that drastically reduces your desire for it. This is beneficial for a wide variety of reasons, but especially so for those looking to avoid temptations of lust. And, yes, sex is an expression of lust, not love. Asexual couples prove that point quite well, even if it's hard for some allosexual people to separate the two.

Sex in marriage is therefore allowed tentatively if the primary goal is procreation rather than satisfying one's lust, but it's still seen as not ideal. Indeed, it is sort of playing with fire and celibacy is still held as the higher virtue. This is the reason why scripture might seem homophobic; there is no procreation in homosexual activity, and therefore its only real goal could be to satisfy lust. Straight people really aren't supposed to have sex, either, though.

The hypocrisy here is that, over the years, churches have become a lot more lax with heterosexual activity but have a double-standard for homosexuality. This is totally homophobic and not what the scriptures say at all, but I doubt the gay people pushing to have their marriages recognized really want to hear, "Technically, straight people shouldn't get married, either."

Either sexual activity is okay or it isn't. There should be no special case for straight relationships.

ETA: I should mention that I'm also an anti-natalist, and so I don't even see sex for the sake of procreation as acceptable.
 
Last edited:
I think many religions draw a distinction between the married householder and the ascetic monk or hermit. However this does not seem to apply to Judaism -- and Islam might even discourage celibacy?
Ella S. said:
However, Jesus taught asceticism. For
Click to expand...
I'm not too sure he did? I think his teaching was more inclusive? He disallowed divorce, but seems not to have made any other judgements about sex and marriage?
 
RJM Corbet said:
I'm not too sure he did?
Click to expand...

He teaches about devoting oneself wholly to God and the service of one's neighbors to the point of sacrificing everything else in your life, even to the point of selling all of your possessions and giving the clothes off your back to those in need. If that's not asceticism, then I don't know what is.
 
wil said:
Sort of repeating above.above.

http://religiousinstitute.org/denom...part-ii-what-the-bible-does-and-does-not-say/
Click to expand...

This isn't about homosexuality. It's just an example of one sin excused and another is is not.

Whether it's an actual sin or not is irrelevant since the context isn't about the nature of homosexuality. I'm just using the word as it is most commonly defined by christians for the OP rather than the actual meaning and correct biblical interpretations (which vary just as other said sins).
 
Ella S. said:
He teaches about devoting oneself wholly to God and the service of one's neighbors to the point of sacrificing everything else in your life, even to the point of selling all of your possessions and giving the clothes off your back to those in need. If that's not asceticism, then I don't know what is.
Click to expand...
Fair point
 
You can take the term homosexuality out and just use same sex sex with intention of lust for the OP. I've never heard the bible not mentioning this as a sin in it's scriptures so I'm curious too other interpretations thereof?

(Cough or use sodomy)
 
Last edited:
RJM Corbet said:
IMO many sins are tribal necessities, to maintain the strength of the tribe, but do not apply outside it. So it's not ok to murder or steal from a member of my own tribe, but ok to do it to someone from another tribe.

Tribal marriage and adultery laws are there to prevent inbreeding and spread of sexual transmitted diseases.

The seven deadly sins however are sins that affect the sinner more than they affect others: Lust Gluttony Greed Sloth Wrath Envy Pride ...
Click to expand...

What is the rational of murder done outside the tribe?

(And does the sin of murder matter based on it's intent and/or just determined wether it is so if committed in the tribe or not?)

Which is different than sodomy because it effects tribal survival?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top