I think its probably more like "man's opposition to homosexuality", not God's. Perhaps many have read more of their own biased thoughts into their interpretations of certain passages.
Then I suggest that you take a look at the passages. The principle ones are listed in the OP.
And this has been addressed and or refuted in the following posts on this thread:
> #38 (Acim), followed by understanding that it is some human's interpretation as noted in #39 (Skwim)
> #68 (Warren Clark)
> #69, 2nd half of post (Acim) and #70 (Acim)
> #74 (Acim), followed up with admission that "condemnation of homosexuality isn't clear" in one of OP cited passages (Skwim) #88
> #90 (Acim)
> #136 (earlwooters), followed up by admission in #137 that the inspired passages are "interpretation of men" (Skwim)
> #153 (Many Sages One Truth), acknowledged with follow up, once again, (#154) saying, "The following are "typical interpretations by religious conservatives" . . ." (Skwim)
>> There may be more than the posts I have cited in this thread. I think there are, but not as clear cut as the above.
So back to what javajo said, "its probably more like "man's opposition to homosexuality", not God's. Perhaps many have read more of their own biased thoughts into their interpretations of certain passages."
At some point, which we've probably already arrived at, this thread's logic becomes circular, and not progressing, even a little bit. Because the central question in OP, is "why does God detest homosexuality?" And then cites passages where that detesting and/or condemnation is allegedly made known. Yet respondents in this thread (myself included) have noted that most of the passages cited in OP are not condemning homosexuality, and have explained what the passages are about, instead. The ones that are more or less clearly portraying homosexual behavior as detestable are either not explaining the why (which has already been noted in this thread) or are being elaborated upon / promoted by those humans (let's call them conservative Christians) who have a biased agenda in this matter that is not stated, clearly, in the text in question. So, it is accurate to say, as javajo did, that "many have read more of their own biased thoughts into their interpretations of certain passages."
Which I believe OP has done, on more than one occasion, on this thread. Not all passages cited in #1 are condemning homosexuality, and it is misrepresentation to suggest otherwise.