Go Back   Christian Guitar Forum > Community > Academic > History
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Arcade Mark Forums Read

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-10-2005, 05:28 PM   #1
Registered User
 
OneHope's Avatar
 

Joined: Nov 2004
Location: Dreaming of far off countries
Posts: 2,338
Homosexuality and Civilizations

In a thread in GD, this was said;

Quote:
Originally Posted by someone
As far as homosexuality and divorce, looking at history, homosexuality is a harbinger of a cultures destruction more than divorce. Every major fall of civilizations that crumbled seem to follow a pattern, Aztec, Maya, Greek, Roman, etc. Homosexual acceptance precedes destruction in a more advanced stage than does divorce in historical civilizations. Basically, both are components of a societal destruction, but I would attribute to homosexual acceptance, a latter stage of decay which is virtually inevitable.
So, is this true, does acceptance of homosexuality precede civilizations distructions? If so, what would be the cause of this? Would homosexuality be a by-product of a destructive way of thinking or does homosexuality cause this directly? Please, no debate on whether homosexuality is a sin or not; we'll just assume it is. And I know that Bible verses could apply but I'm looking for a more sociological/pshychological answer rather than a theological one.

OneHope is offline  
Sponsored Links
Old 05-10-2005, 05:43 PM   #2
Crushy McSternum
 
H.M. Murdock's Avatar
 

Joined: Apr 2002
Location: Ball, Louisiana.
Posts: 8,347
Homosexuality in and of itself cannot be blamed for the fall of a civilization. Homosexuality and alleged "sexual freedom" and "enlightenment" has always been nothing more than a symptom of a nation's downfall. This is because a civilization is always doomed when it becomes sensate and begins to focus on sensationalism- doing what feels good, focusing on the flesh, etc., rather than seeking higher enlightenment.
Look at Rome. Marcus Aurelius is quite possibly one of the most enlightened emperors of the Roman Empire. Yet his son, Commodus, was a sensate fool and single-handedly stuck the knife in that killed Rome. That is not to say that Commodus himself caused the fall of Rome entirely- he removed the enlightened level of authority and made the nation, on the whole, sensate from the lowest pleb to the highest government official. His father kept the empire afloat by not being sensate, thus directing his rule towards more "enlightened" goals of the intellectual, wiser sort.
An example of a nation not becoming sensate would have to be dynastic China. Sure, sex wasn't all that taboo- but they still didn't focus on it, generally. Eastern cultures have almost always been pointed more towards higher enlightenment. This is why China was as powerful as it was for as long as it was. The Chinese empire as we see it in the history books collapsed, some say, because of a curse put on the nation (or the then-ruling dynasty). Then a concubine from the province that had cursed the dynasty got in edgewise with the emperor, seduced him heavily, ran the throne from behind the emperor's back, and set up her son on the throne- he was a malicious, sensate fool and ran the empire into the ground.

Look it up. At some point in history, a culture becomes focused entirely on the focused, thinking it better to live for the moment than to live for wisdom. It is at that point that their doom is almost always guaranteed, because they begin to rule and be ruled foolishly. It's self-destruction to a civilization to be sensate.

I have a source for all this, of course. Actually, I have a lovely conversation with Dr. Jeff Meyers back in January about this topic, and he gave me the source. A book by some guy who researched every civilization's decline and fall and came to the conclusion that the rise of sensationalism is the death of a culture. But I can't remember it right now, so I'll get back to you if I find it again.
__________________

Now thou hast loved me one whole day,
To-morrow when thou leavest, what wilt thou say ?
Wilt thou then antedate some new-made vow ?
Or say that now
We are not just those persons which we were ?
-Woman's Constancy (John Donne)
H.M. Murdock is offline  
Old 05-10-2005, 07:10 PM   #3
Registered User
 
OneHope's Avatar
 

Joined: Nov 2004
Location: Dreaming of far off countries
Posts: 2,338
Cool, I'd like to read that book.
OneHope is offline  
Old 05-10-2005, 07:30 PM   #4
Dogbert's back!
 
Jenacen's Avatar
 

Joined: Jul 2003
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,320
Here's mine.

It seems to me that homosexuality shows the extent to which morality in a culture has degraded. Ultimately, it's going to go back to how the culture treats the concept of God, specifically God of our Bible. Let me back it with a story I read today.

There was a missionary who went to the Amazon a while ago, and though he was killed, his daughter or wife or someone from his husband went there anyways to tell them about Christ. They were greatly amazed at the love this woman showed them, despite the murder of her relative missionary. They accepted Christ, and things really changed. The population went from 200 to 1000, health improved, death was down, and much more. Part of it is how fearing the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, and how Christians are expected to love each other, that constitute for the changes.

Whenever there's accountability to someone who's higher than you, usually people straighten up their attitude, right? In cultures where God is absent or His Word is corrupted, there's a lack of respect for Him, and as a result they don't fear Him. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. But since they don't belive in God, or do so liberally, morality is going to drop because they don't believe God will do anything. Like H.M. Murdock said, they eventually start seeking pleasure instead of wisdom. Eventually people will get very desperate (non-marital sex is an empty thing, remember), and where do they turn? To the same sex!

People's minds can work very strangely. People might get impressions that a child is a homosexual because they don't quite understand how to act around other boys and girls (that's how they act at such an early age, so it must be natural, right? (wrong!)) Men who have had no male influences in their lives could turn because of that, or a girl because her father was extremely abusive and is afraid of men because of it. Or, going along with the idea that non-marital sex is unfulfilling, people probably start thinking they're gay. Obviously, sex with the opposite gender was unfulfilling, so the pleasure will probably be found in another source, right? And of course, in a culture where fear of God and morals are absent, why couldn't it be all of those things?

My whole point is that it's because the concept of God diminishes, the whole concept of morals diminished too. You really can't have one without the other. If there's no God, who cares about being good? The best you could hope for is that if you be good enough, Santa might bring you presents (and people eventually stop believing in him). Of these pairs, which ones sound more convincing?

--It's better to have sex when you're married because it reduces risks of STDs.
--Pre-marital sex is wrong, because God made sex uniquely for marriage, and any other use is a defilement of His perfect creation.

--Apologize to that kid! That's not nice to call people names!
--God will hold you accountable for every careless word you say.

--Abortion is wrong.
--God commands us not to kill.

--Don't lie (as long as the kid doesn't get caught, he'll lie again, right?)
--God hears every word you say, has commanded you not to lie, and will hold you accountable for it.

See the differences? Without God, there's no incentive for good. History tells us that if people aren't seeking God, they're seeking pleasure, and that could lead you to fall in many different ways.
__________________
My repertoire of songs
My journal

"Genius is 1 percent inspiration and 99% perspiration, which is why engineers sometimes smell really bad."

"When you forsake your victories to fix your failures, is it any wonder you've got nothing to celebrate?"


Devotional: Arrogant Speech and Lying Rulers (7/9/08)
Jenacen is offline  
Old 05-11-2005, 07:50 PM   #5
You wanna see dry land?
 
Insane Drummer's Avatar
 

Joined: Aug 2001
Location: Water World!
Posts: 9,746
Send a message via AIM to Insane Drummer
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneHope
In a thread in GD, this was said;



So, is this true, does acceptance of homosexuality precede civilizations distructions? If so, what would be the cause of this? Would homosexuality be a by-product of a destructive way of thinking or does homosexuality cause this directly? Please, no debate on whether homosexuality is a sin or not; we'll just assume it is. And I know that Bible verses could apply but I'm looking for a more sociological/pshychological answer rather than a theological one.
The problem with trying to answer this is that there are so many factors involved. Maybe homosexuality was accepted in all these before they fell. But what about the fall of other empires that didn't go this way? It is plainly seen that homosexuality is not the only cause for a nations fall. Therefore we must examine other causes and see if these were present at the fall of the empires listed. Outside intervention (invasion... and so on), weak leadership, economic failure, so on.

Aztec and Maya both suffered from outside intervention namely the Spanish. The random arrival that lead to their fall had 0 to do with their causing it. It cannot be said that homosexuality led to their fall.

Rome's fall can be blamed on many things. Outside intervention, failing economy, weaking leadership. The onset of the Goths and other barbarians cannot be said to be a cause of homosexuality, neither can out growing that which can be administered well. Rome's fall cannot be said to be caused by homosexuality.

Greek, it is to be noted that during the time when Sparta was gaining great power it was also in great praise for homosexuality, while at this time Athens was in decline and they did not praise it. (I am not to knowledgable about Greece so I may have my facts wrong).

Another thing to note... Aztec and Maya practiced human sacrifice, Rome gladatorial games, Greece along with homosexuality pediophilia. All of these are "As evil" if not more evil than homosexuality.

It seems clear that most nations are lead by men, and men are by nature evil. Therefore nations will allow some evil. No single sin or evil can be said to lead to the downfall of nations.
__________________
I have been to Fort Worth...
mmmhmmm...
And I have been to Spain
And I have been too proud to come in out of the rain
Insane Drummer is offline  
Old 05-11-2005, 09:24 PM   #6
student
 

Joined: Jan 2005
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 987
Send a message via AIM to cuziamthecaptai
Oh man you people crack me up. I am literally laughing in my chair.

Do you really think men having sex with men is what broke apart the greek and roman empires? You do know that romans would leave their unwanted babies to die by exposure? mabye that led to their downfall.

Everyone knows bi-sexuality was the norm here, for decades before anything happened to break apart the empires. Actually, gay-sex served as a bonding experience among men, and was at the forefront of the very inception of greek culture. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/homosexuality/

the roman empire fell apart when, as conquests decreased, economic stagnation left armies unable to defend their vast territory from enemies.
http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/journa.../Goldberg.html

Edited - this comment is unnecessary and brings nothing to the conversation.

be careful gentlemen:

Adams, Henry E. (1996). Is homophobia associated with homosexual arousal? Journal of Abnormal Psychology 105(3), pp. 440-445.

Edited for inappropriate content
__________________
Laughter is the closest distance between two people.

Victor Borge (1909 - 2000)

Last edited by ICTHUS; 05-12-2005 at 01:45 PM.
cuziamthecaptai is offline  
Old 05-11-2005, 09:59 PM   #7
Senior Non-Posting Member
 
rockin4theking's Avatar
 

Joined: Oct 2001
Location: The not too distant past.
Posts: 4,053
Quote:
Originally Posted by cuziamthecaptai
Oh man you people crack me up. I am literally laughing in my chair.
Glad we can be of service.

Quote:
Do you really think men having sex with men is what broke apart the greek and roman empires?
Nope. The question at is not "did homosexuality bring down the Greek and Roman empires," but rather "is rampant homosexuality an indicator of the decline of empires."

It seems to me that maybe rampant homosexuality is an indicator of an empire's decline and eventual collapse, but there are many, many other factors that contribute to the downfall of an empire. So in my opinion it's pure speculation as to whether homosexuality causes empires to fall, or is even an indicator of an empire's demise.

My $.02.
rockin4theking is offline  
Old 05-11-2005, 10:01 PM   #8
Real candidate of change
 
JerryLove's Avatar
 

Joined: Sep 2001
Location: Tampa, Fl
Posts: 17,259
Send a message via AIM to JerryLove
Quote:
So, is this true, does acceptance of homosexuality precede civilizations distructions?
Short answer: No. I can see no correlation between the acceptance of homosexuality and the downfall of a civilizaton. I can think of very anti-homosexual groups that have fallen (the Taliban comes to mind) as well as very pro-homosexual groups that have not (the Japanese).

Quote:
Homosexuality in and of itself cannot be blamed for the fall of a civilization. Homosexuality and alleged "sexual freedom" and "enlightenment" has always been nothing more than a symptom of a nation's downfall. This
This appears entirely unfounded in reality. Some Greek city-states had compulsery homosexualiy (Sparta, on whom much of the US government is founded) and most all were "sexually enlightened". They fell merely to a more powerful millitary (the Romans).

The Romans, on the other hand, viewed sex as very bad and immoral... and thus were far more deviant even than most of the Greeks. It's interesting actually, that there's a passage in the new testement that says the "effeminate" will not get into heaven. Despite some versions taking this as "homosexual" (a reasonable symonym of the modern word), the Romans were actually referring to those who were overly open about sex... those who were seen as revelling in it.

I can't think of a time and culture which was not sensationalist.

Quote:
It seems to me that homosexuality shows the extent to which morality in a culture has degraded.
Depends on how you define "morality". Certainly, in the proper meaning of the word (the one you'll find in a dictaionaty), it talks about an adherence to a moral code, not what the morals are.

The culture of Feudal Japan was very moral, and homosexuality was perfectly accepted.

Quote:
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. But since they don't belive in God, or do so liberally, morality is going to drop because they don't believe God will do anything.
Crime is lower in Switzerland than the US, even though Switzerland is more secular (less God fearing).

I don't fear God, I don't even believe in him, but will gladly hold my behavior up against the "moral norm" and, except for a few spots where I simply don't hold the same moral as you (poligamy, pre-marital sex, etc) will win. Heck, I have morals that Christians don't (I generally never lie, for example).

Quote:
Obviously, sex with the opposite gender was unfulfilling, so the pleasure will probably be found in another source, right? And of course, in a culture where fear of God and morals are absent, why couldn't it be all of those things?
Are you attracted to people of your own sex?

If the Bible said that God wanted you to be attracted to people of the same sex, would you be able to change that attraction?

There's a scale (the Kensey scale) that rates homosexuality on a scale from 1 (completely heterosexual) to 10 (complete homosexual) with 5-6 bing "no preference".

I rate a 1-2, my girlfriend is 4-5... most "heterosexuals" fall into the 3-4 category. The closer you are to the middle of tihs scale, the more something like "life experience" or "choice" enters into your sexual preference. There's no support for homosexuality being the result of rearing, in fact the twins studies point in exactly the opposite direction.

Quote:
--It's better to have sex when you're married because it reduces risks of STDs.
--Pre-marital sex is wrong, because God made sex uniquely for marriage, and any other use is a defilement of His perfect creation.

--Apologize to that kid! That's not nice to call people names!
--God will hold you accountable for every careless word you say.

--Abortion is wrong.
--God commands us not to kill.

--Don't lie (as long as the kid doesn't get caught, he'll lie again, right?)
--God hears every word you say, has commanded you not to lie, and will hold you accountable for it.
1, 1, 2, 2.

Since question three and four give me no reason (in their first option), any reason sounds better than none. If you had attempted a secular case in the last two examples, I likely would have chosen them.

I don't normally lie, I don't steal, I don't hurt people, I go out of my way to help people, I don't falsify my taxes, I don't connive to get out of parking tickets, I give to and support charities, and I don't believe in God.
JerryLove is offline  
Old 05-11-2005, 10:07 PM   #9
You wanna see dry land?
 
Insane Drummer's Avatar
 

Joined: Aug 2001
Location: Water World!
Posts: 9,746
Send a message via AIM to Insane Drummer
Quote:
Originally Posted by cuziamthecaptai
Oh man you people crack me up. I am literally laughing in my chair.

Do you really think men having sex with men is what broke apart the greek and roman empires? You do know that romans would leave their unwanted babies to die by exposure? mabye that led to their downfall.

Everyone knows bi-sexuality was the norm here, for decades before anything happened to break apart the empires. Actually, gay-sex served as a bonding experience among men, and was at the forefront of the very inception of greek culture. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/homosexuality/

the roman empire fell apart when, as conquests decreased, economic stagnation left armies unable to defend their vast territory from enemies.
http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/journa.../Goldberg.html

Perhaps you should go to actual academic sources rather than internet cooks and fundy lit.

be careful gentlemen:

Adams, Henry E. (1996). Is homophobia associated with homosexual arousal? Journal of Abnormal Psychology 105(3), pp. 440-445.

Let's just say you fundies wouldn't want to know the answer to that one.
Did you read my post... I am 'fundy' and agreed pretty much with all you said exactly.
__________________
I have been to Fort Worth...
mmmhmmm...
And I have been to Spain
And I have been too proud to come in out of the rain
Insane Drummer is offline  
Old 05-12-2005, 09:04 AM   #10
Rock on
Administrator
 
BillSPrestonEsq's Avatar
 

Joined: Jun 2001
Location: Beaverton, Or
Posts: 39,694
paid
The original quote is mine. CuzIamthecaptai totally missed my point.

I do not view homosexuality as a cause of downfall, but that its acceptance is seen at times where hedonistic thought has raised to preeminance, and thus you see this before a fall based on other factors, much as dogs howl before an earthquake.

dogs howl before an earthquake for an underlying reason, not a causal relationship. In the same way, in the empires of the world you do see a greater acceptance of homosexual sex before a civilization crumbles. From a secular perspective, the hedonistic group becomes focused on self and the nation or empire is weakened by the lack of cultural identity and homogenity of culture.

From a biblical perspective... Read Romans 1.

BTW, I am no homophobe, as I am in no way really repulsed by it any more than say, premarital sex. (I am just being honest)
__________________
For this I will be judged.


My Life.



POW!
BillSPrestonEsq is offline  
Old 05-12-2005, 09:16 AM   #11
Real candidate of change
 
JerryLove's Avatar
 

Joined: Sep 2001
Location: Tampa, Fl
Posts: 17,259
Send a message via AIM to JerryLove
What about my response to the topic?
JerryLove is offline  
Old 05-12-2005, 09:34 AM   #12
Primordial Demon
 
Qingu's Avatar
 

Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,954
Can't you just as easily say that Rome's acceptance of Christianity was a sign of its fall?

More easily, in fact. Romans were homosexuals for centuries, Greece centuries before that (and Greece did not really "fall," Rome preserved and assimilated its civilization). But the Greco-Roman civilization did not even start to decline until Christianity became the official religion.

And surely enough, Christendom (the inheritors of the fallen Greco-Roman civilization) did not really start to recover from its fall until secularism became accepted after the Enlightenment.

While I can't really speak with much authority on other cultures, as far as Western civilization goes, two things can be said:
1. There is absolutely no correlation between the "fall" of a civilization and its embrace of homosexuality,
2. There actually is a fairly strong correlation between the "fall" of civilization and its embrace of Christian dogma.

My question is why do Christians hypocritically argue from "civilizations' fall"?
__________________
<a href="http://www.myspace.com/apsuka_mayaka">My myspace.</a>
Qingu is offline  
Old 05-12-2005, 09:37 AM   #13
Rock on
Administrator
 
BillSPrestonEsq's Avatar
 

Joined: Jun 2001
Location: Beaverton, Or
Posts: 39,694
paid
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerryLove
What about my response to the topic?

finding a civilization that got crushed, (Taliban) is unrelated. I was reffering to nations that collapse from the inside. Its more of a pattern that can be observed in a lot of situations that concerns me. It concerns me merely in the sense that it appears in large part to be a historical pattern, and the fact that we do live in hedonistic times makes it appear plausible that our culture is nearing some form of major shift.

I am not familiar with feudal Japan as thouroughly as I would like. I am merely saying something disturbs me because it appears to fall into a historical pattern of nations in decline. Its much the same way that the decline of gangs to the individual thug disturbs me as well.

Just part of atrend which appears to be focused on the individual.

Sparta's compulsory activity was odd, and rather anomylous. One could argue for numerous reasons of the fall of sparta, but you are right, conquest was primary. However, the homosexuality of Sparta was rather different than most today in that it performed a societal purpose of cultural identification. It is not quite the same. Rome fell owing to military invasion, however, the cause was a general decay in the unity of the culture.
__________________
For this I will be judged.


My Life.



POW!
BillSPrestonEsq is offline  
Old 05-12-2005, 09:45 AM   #14
Primordial Demon
 
Qingu's Avatar
 

Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,954
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jenacen
Whenever there's accountability to someone who's higher than you, usually people straighten up their attitude, right?
You mean like the Aztecs? They were quite religious and morally strict. They also had thousands of human sacrifices and went to war just to get more victims.

Or maybe you mean like medieval Christendom, which under the Catholic Church's Inquisition tortured and murdered tens of millions of people during its reign.

Quote:
In cultures where God is absent or His Word is corrupted, there's a lack of respect for Him, and as a result they don't fear Him. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. But since they don't belive in God, or do so liberally, morality is going to drop because they don't believe God will do anything.
Explain why for most of history, Christian civilization (under the Catholic Church) was barbaric and immoral and not as advanced as the Greco-Roman civilication before it or the Islamic civilization contemporary with it.

Or were they not real Christians (TM)...?

Quote:
People's minds can work very strangely. People might get impressions that a child is a homosexual because they don't quite understand how to act around other boys and girls (that's how they act at such an early age, so it must be natural, right? (wrong!)) Men who have had no male influences in their lives could turn because of that, or a girl because her father was extremely abusive and is afraid of men because of it. Or, going along with the idea that non-marital sex is unfulfilling, people probably start thinking they're gay. Obviously, sex with the opposite gender was unfulfilling, so the pleasure will probably be found in another source, right? And of course, in a culture where fear of God and morals are absent, why couldn't it be all of those things?
What does this pseudo-psychological tirade have to do with the decline of civilization?

Quote:
My whole point is that it's because the concept of God diminishes, the whole concept of morals diminished too. You really can't have one without the other.
Then please account for 1,000 years of Christian barbarism during the middle ages.
__________________
<a href="http://www.myspace.com/apsuka_mayaka">My myspace.</a>
Qingu is offline  
Old 05-12-2005, 09:47 AM   #15
Real candidate of change
 
JerryLove's Avatar
 

Joined: Sep 2001
Location: Tampa, Fl
Posts: 17,259
Send a message via AIM to JerryLove
The Taliban fell in much the same way as the Greek or Japanese Empires. After centuries and centuries of open acceptance of homosexuality, they fell to a more powerful millitairy. There was no internal collapse.

For the Japanese, the break-down of morality was the appearance of Christianity.
JerryLove is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:35 PM.


Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2