Sexual Orientation: Nature or Nurture?

[JRT]

Conversion therapy is a false concept. One cannot convert away the innate sinfulness of humankind via counseling.

I was not suggesting converting away innate sinfulness, I was referring to gay conversion therapy. Aside from that, I am not sure that the term "innate sinfulness" refers to a real human condition.

 

[MennoSota]

I was not suggesting converting away innate sinfulness, I was referring to gay conversion therapy. Aside from that, I am not sure that the term "innate sinfulness" refers to a real human condition.

I'm referring to gay conversion therapy. We cannot expect unregenerate sinners to change their innate, sinful, pleasures without God changing their hearts, just as I cannot expect you to change your innate sinful pleasures without God changing your heart.
Therapies are just Band-Aids on cancer. Only God can heal us and place Christ in supremacy over our sinful selves.

 

[JRT]

I do not read the Genesis myth as a fall from an original state of perfection into sin and death. The first couple were completely innocent and naive creatures. They were certainly capable of making a mistake but, without knowing good from evil, they lacked even the ability to sin. That ability came only with them eating of the "Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil". To me the story is a "coming of age story". Our mythical first couple graduated from animal status into to fully self aware human beings capable of making moral judgements. This is not an Original Sin story but rather an Original Blessing story that should be celebrated. We are not a people fallen from an original state of perfection into sin and death.
Why the expulsion from Eden? In the mythology, I believe it to be symbolic that mankind was no longer a naïve creature living in moral ignorance but had become real men and women living in a real world where there was real good and evil.
What we are is a people that is still evolving and that evolution has profoundly affected not just our bodies but our psyches as well. The world in which we evolved was a difficult and dagerous one and mere survival was of the highest priority. Selfishness became a part of who we are as a survival mechanism. This selfish instinct is no longer as necessary as in our savage past but it is still powerful. If there is an "Original Sin", this is it. Of course it is not a sin really but an innate part of our nature and it can be overcome.
In the words of John Spong: "Every living thing, plant and animal is programmed to survive. What is true of all these living things is also true of human life. The only difference is that we human beings are self-conscious, while plants and animals are not. If survival is our highest goal, self-centeredness is inevitable and thus this quality becomes a constant part of the human experience. Traditionally, the church has called this "original sin" and has explained it with the myth of the fall. That was simply wrong. Survival is a quality found in life itself. There was no fall. Self-centered, survival driven, self-conscious creatures is simply who we are. There is thus no such thing as "original sin" from which we need to be rescued by a divine invader. So much of traditional Christianity assumes this false premise."

 

[Andrew]

I used to really be into Joseph Campbell, the way he explained it was that for a long time we were blind and didn't see the violence we created (speaking on evolution) until we could literally see and see our violent state of being, he considered our peak of consciousness of all senses to be the symbolic fruit.
Then I became a Christian
I don't see it as a celebration as you put it, I've heard Jews even say that we were meant to take the fruit of knowledge or else we would have remained blind and dopey... No matter how you slice it however it does not take away the fact that you and I and everyone here and all you have lived and are to come have sinned.
Who knows exactly what happened unless you were there, the fact is that we are rebellious and the world is rebellious, we on our own will never get it together, we definitely do not need technical advantages to make us perfect but need the understanding of scripture to make us righteous.. If you do believe in evolution and that God created evolution but gave us a symbolic metaphor to "get it" and our nature, then you must believe his New Creation no matter how symbolically we read of it in Revelation.. It's just as blurry I mean we can never "prove" it scientifically -but however God chooses to create we must understand and hear His message the way He wants us to receive it.
The serpent to me will always mean "temptation" and thus all were tempted but God has provided mankind a Savior

 

[MennoSota]

I do not read the Genesis myth as a fall from an original state of perfection into sin and death. The first couple were completely innocent and naive creatures. They were certainly capable of making a mistake but, without knowing good from evil, they lacked even the ability to sin. That ability came only with them eating of the "Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil". To me the story is a "coming of age story". Our mythical first couple graduated from animal status into to fully self aware human beings capable of making moral judgements. This is not an Original Sin story but rather an Original Blessing story that should be celebrated. We are not a people fallen from an original state of perfection into sin and death.
Why the expulsion from Eden? In the mythology, I believe it to be symbolic that mankind was no longer a naïve creature living in moral ignorance but had become real men and women living in a real world where there was real good and evil.
What we are is a people that is still evolving and that evolution has profoundly affected not just our bodies but our psyches as well. The world in which we evolved was a difficult and dagerous one and mere survival was of the highest priority. Selfishness became a part of who we are as a survival mechanism. This selfish instinct is no longer as necessary as in our savage past but it is still powerful. If there is an "Original Sin", this is it. Of course it is not a sin really but an innate part of our nature and it can be overcome.
In the words of John Spong: "Every living thing, plant and animal is programmed to survive. What is true of all these living things is also true of human life. The only difference is that we human beings are self-conscious, while plants and animals are not. If survival is our highest goal, self-centeredness is inevitable and thus this quality becomes a constant part of the human experience. Traditionally, the church has called this "original sin" and has explained it with the myth of the fall. That was simply wrong. Survival is a quality found in life itself. There was no fall. Self-centered, survival driven, self-conscious creatures is simply who we are. There is thus no such thing as "original sin" from which we need to be rescued by a divine invader. So much of traditional Christianity assumes this false premise."

Sounds like you are creating man in your image.

 

[MennoSota]

I do not read the Genesis myth as a fall from an original state of perfection into sin and death. The first couple were completely innocent and naive creatures. They were certainly capable of making a mistake but, without knowing good from evil, they lacked even the ability to sin. That ability came only with them eating of the "Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil". To me the story is a "coming of age story". Our mythical first couple graduated from animal status into to fully self aware human beings capable of making moral judgements. This is not an Original Sin story but rather an Original Blessing story that should be celebrated. We are not a people fallen from an original state of perfection into sin and death.
Why the expulsion from Eden? In the mythology, I believe it to be symbolic that mankind was no longer a naïve creature living in moral ignorance but had become real men and women living in a real world where there was real good and evil.
What we are is a people that is still evolving and that evolution has profoundly affected not just our bodies but our psyches as well. The world in which we evolved was a difficult and dagerous one and mere survival was of the highest priority. Selfishness became a part of who we are as a survival mechanism. This selfish instinct is no longer as necessary as in our savage past but it is still powerful. If there is an "Original Sin", this is it. Of course it is not a sin really but an innate part of our nature and it can be overcome.
In the words of John Spong: "Every living thing, plant and animal is programmed to survive. What is true of all these living things is also true of human life. The only difference is that we human beings are self-conscious, while plants and animals are not. If survival is our highest goal, self-centeredness is inevitable and thus this quality becomes a constant part of the human experience. Traditionally, the church has called this "original sin" and has explained it with the myth of the fall. That was simply wrong. Survival is a quality found in life itself. There was no fall. Self-centered, survival driven, self-conscious creatures is simply who we are. There is thus no such thing as "original sin" from which we need to be rescued by a divine invader. So much of traditional Christianity assumes this false premise."

You really need to listen to this sermon on the Supremacy of God. Voddie Baucham speaks directly to your worldview and shows why it is so lacking.
https://youtu.be/cZYDOwRM3Z0

 

[atpollard]

Used in this context, this posting is an ad hominem attack. It's also reversible, since the amount of passion directed against homosexuality is out of all proportion to its importance in the Bible. There are three references in the NT, two of which refer to abusive forms of same-gender sex, and one of which (Rom 1) is almost certainly part of a quotation from someone with whom Paul disagrees.

But people are not holding a “Drunk Pride Day” or an “Alcoholic, Smoker and Drug User Parade” with anyone suggesting that drunkenness or drug abuse might be wrong being charged with hate speech and sued out of business for failing to support drunkenness in your business.

So SOCIETY has made the LBGQT issue different, not the Church.

 

[Frank]

I feel like it is based on nature, but that could also be triggered from nurture (aka like you said if a male is around female figures, his whole mindset would shift towards being more femininity than normal). I'm not sure on a good study about it though since there could even be some other factors that might take affect which aren't too well known (yet).