God and his hatred of homosexuality

[Ingledsva]

Perhaps that's a question best directed to the theists who're operating under the assumption that is in fact a command?

You're invited to start here, here, and here.

If you need more, I'm sure we can drum up a few. Happy Hunting!

Meanwhile, if you were told "Be on time, or we're leaving without you" would you view it as a command, or a blessing?



Blessings aren't typically worded as imperatives, are they?

I'd be more inclined to read it as a blessing if it said "May you be fruitful and multiply."

There is no "or else" following the words.

*

 

[Rick O'Shez]

But obviously we should not lie or steal or kill and all that. We're supposed to repent, no? How does one repent of an orientation? "I'm sorry you made me this way"?

Very well put. I've been trying to make sense of the Biblical disapproval of being gay for some time, but the more I hear the more confused I become. Being gay, a sexual orientation, is constantly lumped in with immoral behaviour like stealing, lying, gluttony (?), porn (?), rape (!), paedophilia (!), all manner of things. It's also been suggested that it's just gay sex which is the sin, so it's OK to be gay if you remain celibate ( or something ).
In any case I can't imagine why a supreme being would be remotely interested in what people get up to in the bedroom, it just seems absurd to me.

 

[viole]

Note, though, that, according to the bible, women who were barren (unable to produce new life) were also "without God," or "sinful." Yet, today, we don't think of impotency in that condemning way. Why, then, do we continue this barbaric double standard with homosexuality (which the ancients didn't understand as we do, anyway)?

Obvious. Changing standard would deny the eternal value of God's moral precepts.

In other words: it would turn God into a moral relativist.

Ciao

- viole

 

[we-live-now]

The medical and psychiatric communities. And those who are gay.

God doesn't say anything in "God's" word. People say that God says things. So, the question really is: "Who are we to believe? Stone-age people who didn't know much about the human psyche, or the medical professionals?"

I think the medical community says that some human beings have a homosexual orientation.

Why are you lumping one's orientation in with addiction?

This is a statement that cannot be backed up with fact. What do our bodies crave that is devoid of God, do you think? Isn't God present in all God's creation?

Homosexual orientation isn't sinful.
It's simplistic to think that Paul means that God accomplishes God's purposes only through "infecting" us with sin. Paul means (basically) that God makes grace-full lemonade out of our lemons.

"Obey" has nothing to do with homosexuality -- except that we should act in a manner that is true to who we are -- whether we're gay or straight.

This is exegetically untenable.

That, also, according to Genesis, is exegetically untenable.

People are who they are. Homosexuality, not being an "addiction," is who a person is. In this case, the outer person reflects the God within.

We are souls that are bodies. There is no such thing as "outer" and "inner." We are whole human beings.

Bunk! that's your poor interpretation that is exegetically untenable.

People don't struggle with their sexual identity; they struggle with the stigma placed on their sexual identity by judgmental, pietistic bullspit such as you've tortured us with here.

This is a very nice little sermonette, but it relies on a whole lot of biased assumption and still only serves to dehumanize, and not set free, the homosexual person to be themselves and be acceptable as they are.

These are very good points and I will think about them when I have more time. You may have more faith t than me.

 

[we-live-now]

You're missing the point that homosexuality isn't about behavior -- it's about identity. One's identity cannot be sin.

Please elaborate on this more. I'd like to understand that.

Is their identity based on who they believe they are (from the trails, pains, and hurts of this life)? Or is it from who God says they are (based on however they know him)?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Is their identity based on who they believe they are

It's more like one's race or gender being part of one's identity. Basic stuff, not just self-view.

 

[we-live-now]

What I don't get is why you are equating being gay ( a sexual orientation ) with those other things, which are about people choosing to act in a harmful way.
You seem to be saying that being gay is a matter of choice, and that it is harmful. Have I got that right?

I am only speaking from a Biblical perspective in what the law (old covenant) defines as "sin". Really, that type of discussion is for those who know and believe the Bible as best they can. I am not totally sure who the full audience is that I am writing to.

My main point is this. God initially defined certain behaviors of man as "sin" under the Law of Moses. Man thought he could keep this law and thus thought he was righteous. Jesus later revealed that true sin is unbelief that he already removed all sin and we have none.

So, if you believe this powerful truth and are trusting this from God but still believe you are "gay" then by all means... just go and live your life and be yourself as best you know. God will reveal the truth to all of us in his time in a personal and non-religious way.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

So, if you believe this powerful truth and are trusting this from God but still believe you are "gay" then by all means... just go and live your life and be yourself as best you know.

So being gay isn't a problem if you believe in God? What if somebody is gay and doesn't believe in God?

 

[we-live-now]

But obviously we should not lie or steal or kill and all that. We're supposed to repent, no? How does one repent of an orientation? "I'm sorry you made me this way"?

Nice question. I am fully convinced the Bible teaches that true "repentance" is really NOT about change of behavior but a change of belief. But a change of behavior will often eventually flow OUT OF true repentance. I am convinced there are more "Atheists" and "agnostics" who know God better in their own hearts than most of the outwardly "religious". Do they love others and try to help/serve them? Are they kind? If so, this person KNOWS GOD inside. The true God.

So, we "repent" of the very false ideas and beliefs we have of who we are as the spirit of God within us convicts us of the false things we believe about God and ourselves. Most of these are fed to us by the very "Church" that is supposed to teach us who God really is. So many of them truly don't know him. They only teach a set of outward rules, regulations (morality) and rituals which is "religion". Their own "manual" proves this. Read and study Hebrews 9 and 10 as it reveals how when the TRUE God (Jesus) appears he will crush and destroy all "religion". It is really the worship of "self".

God calls us his children. ALL OF US. He will also give us the "belief" we need to accept and walk in that too. This is all independent of man's actions and will. It's all done through Christ who is inside all people. The Church doesn't believe this, but that's because they so often teach unbelief of scripture.

If we believe of anything less than this about ourselves and God, we must "repent" by changing our minds and fully agreeing with God's word while waiting for him to make it a true reality (if we don't yet see it).

 

[we-live-now]

So being gay isn't a problem if you believe in God? What if somebody is gay and doesn't believe in God?

I am not a theologian. Just a normal person. However, I have studied the entire Bible for 11 years now and upwards of 6-12 hours most days for almost 3 years now. A lot in the original language. Then, I did something that Christians are trained NOT to do.

Think. Ask, write, ponder, struggle.

I started asking and journaling "how can this be possible"? How can we reconcile the entire Bible? These "crazy" things you are hearing is part of what came back to me. Please know there is always a deeper level of an answer with "God" or whatever you call him/her/it. However, the deeper you go, the more grace there is.

Personally, I am convinced that being "gay" is a person's own opinion and not a fact. This is the same thing many can say about what I am sharing. I get that. (I do make every attempt to live by my own words and anyone can correct me at anytime.)

If there is such a thing as gay it is confined to the (spiritual) or our true "body" under law (death). This true body consists of the outer soul and natural body. Yes, if you study Genesis closely in the original language you will discover our soul is split into "Inner" and "outer" man. Our outer "Man" who is decaying is part soul ("Eve") and part body. Paul confirms this in 2 Cor 4:6. This is not only for "believers" as the Church falsely teaches us (so they feel exclusive or as "insiders" of some sort) but is true for all regardless of religious beliefs.

Can a person prove they are "gay"? Do behaviors prove who we are? I don't believe they do.

Second, just because a person doesn't believe in "God" doesn't necessarily mean they don't believe in any God, does it? Maybe they just don't believe in the (false) God that was presented to them? No, really force-fed to them. You know, the one who says he "loves you unconditionally" but then they turn around and tell you that he "will punish those who don't love him back in an eternal hellfire".

What kind of a crazy, "skitzo" God is that?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Personally, I am convinced that being "gay" is a person's own opinion and not a fact.

Could you say why? Have you talked to many gay people and asked them about this?

Second, just because a person doesn't believe in "God" doesn't necessarily mean they don't believe in any God, does it?

It often does in my experience.

 

[we-live-now]

Could you say why? Have you talked to many gay people and asked them about this?



It often does in my experience.

I think we would all have to first of all very specifically define and agree what "God" is. I think all of us trust in something larger than ourselves on a daily basis, don't we?

To me, a person who believes in no God would have to rely 100% on themselves for everything.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I read somewhere the other day that there is no greater proof that you have made god in your own image when god just so happens to hate the same people you do.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I think we would all have to first of all very specifically define and agree what "God" is

I have converted to Ignosticism.

 

[sojourner]

Obvious. Changing standard would deny the eternal value of God's moral precepts.

In other words: it would turn God into a moral relativist.

Ciao

- viole

Morals are relative. "God said" that the faithful had to take in strangers and travelers and offer them the protection of their home. Perhaps in ancient Israel, that was a good and moral thing to do. Nowadays in Chicago? Different story. You'd be a triple-plated moron to invite a stranger into your home to stay. How is homosexuality any more worthy of remaining static?

 

[sojourner]

These are very good points and I will think about them when I have more time. You may have more faith t than me.

I hope you do and I hope that you think with love instead of judgment.

Thanks.

 

[sojourner]

Please elaborate on this more. I'd like to understand that.

Is their identity based on who they believe they are (from the trails, pains, and hurts of this life)? Or is it from who God says they are (based on however they know him)?

Both! One's sexual identity is a HUGE part of who one knows oneself to be. One can't change orientation any more than one can change from black to white.

Let's put it this way: How do you know you're heterosexual? How does your attraction to and for females inform your daily life? Probably in a lot of ways that fly under your radar of awareness.

Do you think you could "become" homosexual, if society said you had to? Would that make you happy? Or set you free? Would you feel more authentic and honest about yourself? Do you think you'd be "closer to God?" My guess is that the answer to all of these questions is "no," that is, if you're being really honest with yourself. Why should it be any different for homosexuals?

 

[Bill Van Fleet]

We created our religions. Our religions reflect who we are. The problem is us. Religions are a cultural phenomenon. Our religions are important, but they are very non-optimal, because we have not yet learned how to live optimally. We need for our religions to improve. I call that improvement (which I think is occurring, but has a long way to go, Humanianity. What we need to do is work on a basic ethical philosophy for our species, one that we increasingly can agree upon but one that can always be challenged. There is now a good tool for that, but it will be a while before people see the value of it.
Participating in Humanianity

 

[sojourner]

So, we "repent" of the very false ideas and beliefs we have of who we are as the spirit of God within us convicts us of the false things we believe about God and ourselves. Most of these are fed to us by the very "Church" that is supposed to teach us who God really is. So many of them truly don't know him. They only teach a set of outward rules, regulations (morality) and rituals which is "religion". Their own "manual" proves this. Read and study Hebrews 9 and 10 as it reveals how when the TRUE God (Jesus) appears he will crush and destroy all "religion". It is really the worship of "self".

This smacks of thin justification.

 

[sojourner]

Then, I did something that Christians are trained NOT to do.

Think. Ask, write, ponder, struggle.

Hmmm... Most Christians I know are trained to do those things.

How can we reconcile the entire Bible?

We can't. It's not intended to be "reconciled" in its entirety.

Personally, I am convinced that being "gay" is a person's own opinion and not a fact.

how do you go about proving one's core identity? I'm convinced that you're trying very hard to justify not accepting homosexuality as a natural and healthy expression of human sexuality.

If there is such a thing as gay it is confined to the (spiritual) or our true "body" under law (death). This true body consists of the outer soul and natural body. Yes, if you study Genesis closely in the original language you will discover our soul is split into "Inner" and "outer" man. Our outer "Man" who is decaying is part soul ("Eve") and part body. Paul confirms this in 2 Cor 4:6. This is not only for "believers" as the Church falsely teaches us (so they feel exclusive or as "insiders" of some sort) but is true for all regardless of religious beliefs.

This is tortured theological justification with no basis in fact.

Can a person prove they are "gay"?

Can a person prove that they love their spouse?

Second, just because a person doesn't believe in "God" doesn't necessarily mean they don't believe in any God, does it? Maybe they just don't believe in the (false) God that was presented to them? No, really force-fed to them. You know, the one who says he "loves you unconditionally" but then they turn around and tell you that he "will punish those who don't love him back in an eternal hellfire".

What kind of a crazy, "skitzo" God is that?

It's not. It's crazy, schizo theology.