As many of you have probably heard, people who have red hair and freckles are recognized by modern science to have a genetic defect. It is considered a defect because it negates one of the body's natural defenses. The defense against the sun, which is something our species must constantly deal with, it's omnipresent. These people are weak against it, they can not tan, which is all part of the defense mechanism. They are also far more likely to get melanoma, a deadly skin cancer. Well, we call this a "defect" because it essentially goes against nature. Nature would have us be equipped with a defense against the sun that will be part of our whole life. It only makes sense, right?
Well now to the real purpose of this thread. I noticed in another thread a few months ago about whether or not homos could get into heaven or some crap like that. Many apparent homos posted in the thread that their lifestyle was not their choice, that they could not control the way they felt. I think that this is probably true. But they also went on to say that there is research being done to see if it is in fact genetic. Well if it comes to light that it is, then I am sorry to say that it would be my opinion and the opinion of most people, that you have a genetic defect. Not saying it's their fault, but i mean look at the evidence. Nature would have a species reproduce, so that there could be more of that species when the old ones die off, right? There is no arguing with that fact, it's obvious. How long would the human race last if we were all gay? 100 more years at best? So it's easy to see that natural way would be heterosexuality. But the good part is, at least no one can ever call it your choice or your fault. But the other news is, there will come a day when they can correct nearly any genetic defect. This day is very far off, but it is coming, as sure as the clock ticks. Maybe it will take 200 years for the genetics to be completely mastered. But then it will be their choice. To have a genetic defect fixed, or to leave it broken. Just something i thought about after hearing that argument. Thoughts? Opinions?
I think we are all missing something very important in this thread, and possibilly the other thread you were speaking about. justinsn95, I think you are trying to make some logic here of why people are the way they are, and I think you'll end up hitting brick walls all along the way. We may never know why certain people choose homosexuality (or any sin for that matter), but what we do know is the Bible teaches us is to love the sinner, not the sin. Let's also not forget that God doesn’t use a scale to judge us. As New Testament believers, no matter what sin is committed, we believe the blood of Jesus is what saves us. No deed will be good enough to enter Heaven, because you will always fall short. No matter what you offer to God, only your gift of Christ will be good enough to enter Heaven. And this is where all the arguments will start...because people WANT to use a scale to judge people, and they want to believe that God uses a scale to judge people, but God doesn’t work that way.
People believe that if a person commits a crime, that we should give that person some equal form of punishment. If you steal a car, you should go to jail for XX amount of time. If you commit a murder, XX should be your punishment. Also, if a person does XX good deeds, XX should be the reward. Yet, when it comes to God, He doesn’t work that way. Jesus offers us a free gift; you can accept that gift, and when we are at the gates of Heaven, you can place that gift in front of God, and you will be permitted to enter Heaven. It doesn’t matter if you were a saint, a homosexual, or a murderer, your acceptance of Christ as savior and king and His blood is the only gift you can give God that will let you in Heaven. If you choose not to use that gift, and use your good deeds as proof that you deserve to enter Heaven, you will ALWAYS fall short, "for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" Romans 3:23
Trying to explain this only angers those who don't believe. They don't think this is what a loving, just God should be like. This is why Jesus wasn't accepted as the son of God by the Jews - He was NOTHING like they expected God to be. They expected Him to be wrathful when someone committed a sin, yet He wasn't. He was loving; completely opposite of what they believed God to be. 1 John 8:1-11 is a story of an adultous woman who the Pharisees wanted Jesus to judge. In that day, the punishment was to be stoned for adultry. They caught her in the act very early in the morning, and took her to Jesus for punishment while attending Church:
John 8:1-11 (King James Version)
1Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.
2And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.
3And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,
4They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
5Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?
6This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.
7So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
8And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
9And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
10When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
11She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.