God's opposition to homosexuality. Why?

[LuisDantas]

Greetings Dantas, and thank you for your reply

although the text does not mention the subject, like every other scriptures in religion, it is however left to individual understanding, for me its clear, for you, not so much, we are just indifferent. the point i want to stress however is that the pattern of creation that is followed in all created things, tangible or intangible, is a result of intercourse with two elements. . . "male" and "female"

Thanks for your reply, WC.

Unfortunately, I'm still in the dark. I understand that conception of course needs a male and a female. But human nature goes so far beyond those two simple concepts that I still don't see your point.

Surely humans aren't expected to simply attempt to breed at every opportunity regardless of any other considerations, so why discard considerations of actual attraction and emotional inclination? It just doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Pegg]

What do you mean by that? In which sense would sex that is not marital and heterosexual "disallowed" or "unproper"? It sure happens spontaneously enough.

have you ever noticed the little warning labels on prescription medicine boxes which say "do not use this product in any way other then directed by the manufacturer or your doctor"

God is the manufacturer of the sexual organs and he has directed us as to how they are to be used. Anything outside of that is 'misuse'

Why exactly can't people simply disagree with that interpretation?

they can disagree with it

 

[LuisDantas]

have you ever noticed the little warning labels on prescription medicine boxes which say "do not use this product in any way other then directed by the manufacturer or your doctor"

God is the manufacturer of the sexual organs and he has directed us as to how they are to be used. Anything outside of that is 'misuse'

Are you saying then that the scriptures are the equivalent of warning labels?

 

[Pegg]

Are you saying then that the scriptures are the equivalent of warning labels?

only as an analogy

the principle is that God creates something for a purpose, and we use it for a different purpose, IOW we misuse it. And when we misuse it, we are failing to use it for its intended purpose

 

[LuisDantas]

That is highly arguable, and quite frankly, the very existence of God is so questionable in the first place that I don't see why consider such an interpretation.

 

[BruceDLimber]

That's it?

What? Now you're going to object because I decline to set myself up as some sort of shrine of authority??!

I humbly put it to you that you can't have it both ways.

Meaning neither to brag nor to give offense, some of us are at least wise enough to recognize our own limitations.

Peace,

Bruce

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

God is the manufacturer of the sexual organs and he has directed us as to how they are to be used. Anything outside of that is 'misuse'

God wants us to have sex as often as possible, with as many people as possible, so long as we don't hurt anybody.

I'm sorry. It's true.

You've just gotten ahold of a corrupted God message if you think otherwise.

 

[Skwim]

Not quite. I wish you would quote the words where you see it as specifically condemning homosexual activity (of anyone).

Leviticus 18:22
(NIV)
22 “‘Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable.

(NASB)
22 (A)You shall not lie with a male as [a]one lies with a female; it is an abomination.
​

IMO, the whole chapter is too long to quote, and as I stated in earlier post, I think the interpretation of condemnation starts with 19:4-5:

I agree.

But is it clear that it is because of homosexuality? If yes, where is that stated?

Yeah, it isn't very clear, is it.

 

[Skwim]

You asked for a deeper explaination, which comes from the writings of Baha'u'llah, The Founder of the Baha'i Faith, which IMHO explains far greater issues that the past dispensations could not unravel due to mans infant mindset at those times...

"From the pairing of even the smallest particles in the world of being are the grace and bounty of God made manifest; and the higher the degree, the more momentous is the union ... and above all other unions is that between human beings, .... Thus is the primal oneness made to appear."
​

The primal oneness, the realization of God's kingdom on earth (the unification of mankind), is dependent upon the bonding together of individuals in a common social order. The basic (and strongest) bond within a viable social organization would have to be that bond between men and women, the two most different and complementary aspects of man.

Regards

Nice, but it doesn't address why the god of Abraham despises homosexual behavior.

What? Now you're going to object because I decline to set myself up as some sort of shrine of authority??!

I humbly put it to you that you can't have it both ways.

Meaning neither to brag nor to give offense, some of us are at least wise enough to recognize our own limitations.

And that's good.

 

[Acim]

Leviticus 18:22
(NIV)
22 “‘Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable.

(NASB)
22 (A)You shall not lie with a male as [a]one lies with a female; it is an abomination.
​

Now, that's what I was talking about. And your question, I think, is why does God (LORD God, mind you) find the act detestable and/or an abomination.

Short answer - it is not explained to us.

Slight investigative response that comes from Levitcus 18:4-5

You must obey my laws and be careful to follow my decrees. I am the LORD your God. Keep my decrees and laws, for the person who obeys them will live by them. I am the LORD.​

I am the LORD your God is the explanation. Elaborated upon by "those who obey my laws will live by them."

That is best explanation I can come up with given the material and what is requested in this thread.

IMO (and as a side note), the core logic of LORD God is refutable somewhere in the neighborhood of Genesis 2. But that is another discussion for another time.

 

[CaptainBritain]

Now, that's what I was talking about. And your question, I think, is why does God (LORD God, mind you) find the act detestable and/or an abomination.

Short answer - it is not explained to us.

Slight investigative response that comes from Levitcus 18:4-5

You must obey my laws and be careful to follow my decrees. I am the LORD your God. Keep my decrees and laws, for the person who obeys them will live by them. I am the LORD.
​

I am the LORD your God is the explanation. Elaborated upon by "those who obey my laws will live by them."

That is best explanation I can come up with given the material and what is requested in this thread.

IMO (and as a side note), the core logic of LORD God is refutable somewhere in the neighborhood of Genesis 2. But that is another discussion for another time.

Those who obey my laws will live by them?

Sounds like Dear Leader.

Only one thing to do with unjust laws and thats smash em.

 

[Skwim]

Now, that's what I was talking about.

You do know, don't you, that there on-line sites where you can look up all the verses of the Bible, and in their various versions? HERE'S one of them.

And your question, I think, is why does God (LORD God, mind you) find the act detestable and/or an abomination.

Short answer - it is not explained to us.

That's pretty much what I've concluded from the answers here. In fact, there isn't even a hint of his reasoning. So all I can conclude is that he simply doesn't like it. The eeeeew factor.,

Slight investigative response that comes from Levitcus 18:4-5

You must obey my laws and be careful to follow my decrees. I am the LORD your God. Keep my decrees and laws, for the person who obeys them will live by them. I am the LORD.​

I am the LORD your God is the explanation. Elaborated upon by "those who obey my laws will live by them."

That is best explanation I can come up with given the material and what is requested in this thread.

Of course this is no explanation at all, and what other material should be given in the thread to make it easier?

 

[Acim]

You do know, don't you, that there on-line sites where you can look up all the verses of the Bible, and in their various versions? HERE'S one of them.

That's the one I've already been using. Thanks though. I was just glad you posted actual verses that say what you were alleging. Some of the others in OP, I don't see them saying what OP is summarizing them as.

That's pretty much what I've concluded from the answers here. In fact, there isn't even a hint of his reasoning. So all I can conclude is that he simply doesn't like it. The eeeeew factor.,

The "no other gods before Me" and messages that amount to 'don't glorify earthly things over your Creator' is what I believe to be explanation. This hardly has anything to do with homosexuality specifically. And I can think of at least 3 arguments, near core of Christianity, for why it is 'bad' for Christian to not support gay marriage. One is, better for homosexual person to not burn with lust, and so allowance of marriage must be seen as good thing. Otherwise ALL marriage is arguably not a good thing. Secondly, love is God's commandment of your Christian brother. Replacing that with hatred / judgment I think is actually anti-Christian. Thirdly, reserve judgment for God. When humans engage in this it may be "normal," but it is not Christian. You run risk of judgments you make coming back and biting you in the booty.

what other material should be given in the thread to make it easier?

Me, I'd go with progressive revelation. I truly believe we can all write Scripture and it is not that hard. In fact, the receiving of Divine messages from within, I would call natural. The receiving of those message from outside (in a text, and only in that form), I think is slightly dangerous and more so, disempowering.

I am one who could be called "New Ager" mainly because we are in a new age (of human consciousness). There are many teachings around us that touch upon sexuality. In my (somewhat limited) research of theological doctrines, very few of them condemn sexuality (homo or hetero). Very few. My rereadings of the bible passages that allegedly do condemn, shows me, some people are adding interpretations that are not there. Or, as this thread has pointed out, accepting interpretations without applying any thinking. If "Satan" said he detested homosexuality and said, "obey my laws or else," I give Christians enough credit to say, "hey I can think for myself, and need more info before I accept what seems like very shallow decree." Yet when (alleged) God does same thing, suddenly critical thinking goes out the window? For what possible reason?

 

[averageJOE]

the hetro couple are complying with the parameters God has set for sexual relations to be practiced...even though they will never have a child, they can still right have sexual relations as a husband and wife.

the homosexual couple are not within Gods parameters, they are outside of it. That is the difference.

That's where you are wrong. Marriage is a parameter set by man for legal purposes.

 

[waitasec]

the hetro couple are complying with the parameters God has set for sexual relations to be practiced...even though they will never have a child, they can still right have sexual relations as a husband and wife.

the homosexual couple are not within Gods parameters, they are outside of it. That is the difference.

i think you should revisit luke 6...

it's not up to you and jesus would rather have people like you to keep these things to yourself...

live and let live...
we're all gonna die someday.

 

[Storm]

Skwim, has anyone even attempted to answer the actual question?

 

[James Humphreys]

Skwim, has anyone even attempted to answer the actual question?

Let me try. IMO if God is opposed to homosexual behavior, this can't be just some arbitrary dictate. It would have to do something with God's basic nature and his purpose for creating everything. What could that be? Inevitably this gets into a debate of the nature of God and his purpose, so there is bound to be disagreement. But here is a basic outline of what I think.

I think that God is a being who has a masculine and a feminine essence. God is one, but those two aspects exist in (his/her) being, and it is the interaction of those aspects that give rise to a universe that reflects the same. God's purpose of creation is joy, and he finds joy when he can see his reflection in all things that are his creation. The interaction and marriage of a man and woman bring joy to God, because it reflects the dynamic of the creative relationship of masculine and feminine within God that gives rise to the creation of all things. But this reflection of God is not just for his own joy. When all things are harmony with this purpose is when they find their own deepest fulfillment and joy. Homosexuality runs counter to this purpose of God, and ultimately causes pain to God and to the people involved. That claim may not be the way things appear on the surface sometimes, nor coincide with our own personal experience until now, but in the long run I think that is the case.

Anyway, I know I would have to explain this position in more depth, but I'll let anybody who wants to respond to what I said so far first.

 

[WorldCitizen]

Thanks for your reply, WC.

Unfortunately, I'm still in the dark. I understand that conception of course needs a male and a female. But human nature goes so far beyond those two simple concepts that I still don't see your point.

Surely humans aren't expected to simply attempt to breed at every opportunity regardless of any other considerations, so why discard considerations of actual attraction and emotional inclination? It just doesn't make sense to me.

Sorry for the late reply.

the Baha'i viewpoint of human nature is teleological, that is there are certain qualities intended by God for "human nature". "Nature" sometimes gives us examples that do not accord with humans, like some species eating their young, does not mean that is acceptable for human beings to do so and qualities which do not accord to human nature are therefore termed "unnatural". This does not mean that such deviations may not be caused by the operations of "nature".

We are therefore captivated by nature, yet we can still be conscious of a spiritual world, informed of a divine kingdom, one that transcends nature, and recieve bestowals from God whom has deposited into humans illimitable powers by which he can rule the world of nature.

 

[Skwim]

Skwim, has anyone even attempted to answer the actual question?

No, and considering the number of responses I'm kind of surprised. However, I see that James Humphreys here has given it a decent try.

Originally Posted by James Humphreys
God's purpose of creation is joy, and he finds joy when he can see his reflection in all things that are his creation.

The interaction and marriage of a man and woman bring joy to God, because it reflects the dynamic of the creative relationship of masculine and feminine within God that gives rise to the creation of all things.

But this reflection of God is not just for his own joy. When all things are harmony with this purpose is when they find their own deepest fulfillment and joy.

Homosexuality runs counter to this purpose of God, and ultimately causes pain to God and to the people involved.

Thanks for your reply. Not to take exception to any of your suppositions, but your conclusion: "Homosexuality runs counter to this purpose of God, and ultimately causes pain to God and to the people involved." still begs the question of why homosexuality necessarily runs counter to the joy he seeks. Granting that within your explanation male/female sexual expression brings him joy, why should same sex sexual expression bring him pain? To my thinking here, same sex sexual expression would be no different than no sexual expression at all, both not doing what brings god joy. Yet the lack of sexual expression between people is not condemned. It's like being joyful when a favorite relative comes to visit, but being in pain if that relative visits someone else, but not being in pain if the relative visits no one at all. Both run counter to the purpose of my joy, yet only one is condemned. And this I believe leaves us right back at my original question of why. To rephrase a bit. Why is homosexual behavior worse than no sexual behavior at all?

 

[James Humphreys]

No, and considering the number of responses I'm kind of surprised. However, I see that James Humphreys here has given it a decent try.

Thanks for your reply. Not to take exception to any of your suppositions, but your conclusion: "Homosexuality runs counter to this purpose of God, and ultimately causes pain to God and to the people involved." still begs the question of why homosexuality necessarily runs counter to the joy he seeks. Granting that within your explanation male/female sexual expression brings him joy, why should same sex sexual expression bring him pain? To my thinking here, same sex sexual expression would be no different than no sexual expression at all, both not doing what brings god joy. Yet the lack of sexual expression between people is not condemned. It's like being joyful when a favorite relative comes to visit, but being in pain if that relative visits someone else, but not being in pain if the relative visits no one at all. Both run counter to the purpose of my joy, yet only one is condemned. And this I believe leaves us right back at my original question of why. To rephrase a bit. Why is homosexual behavior worse than no sexual behavior at all?

Are you speaking about someone who abstains from sexual activity, because they have homosexual inclinations, but they think that is wrong? Or are you speaking more generally, for instance, including those who abstain from sex because of a religious discipline, or those who just think that having sex would create too many entanglements and interfere with their lifestyle, so they just avoid it?

In my view God created love as the strongest force, because he wanted to relate to us through love, rather primarily just through obedience to commandments (master/servant). Sexual love is not the only dimension of love created by God, but it does have extraordinary power to shape our hearts and characters, according to the way it is expressed. If any and all expressions of sexual love that we can see in our world were created by God, we might expect that all would bring him joy equally. I guess an important question is then, is there a force of evil in the world? If so, how does it operate to influence and control people? Because love is the strongest force, and is so engrained into the very structure of human nature, IMO it is primarily through the power of misdirected love that evil can control our minds and hearts. It creates a sphere of love in opposition to God's sphere of love. This kind of view is not so popular nowadays, but it's what I believe the reality is. As we live in a world in which we face a bewildering number of choices about love, and in which inside of ourselves, even in one day, there might be quite a number of different thoughts and feelings pulling us in varied directions, all related to love in some way, if we don't know and feel God's purpose for creating us in our lives, it's easy to end up going in the wrong direction.

I don't think abstention from sex in the long term, as a way of life, for whatever the reason, is God's ideal. Nevertheless, even though the dimension of sexual love is missing from one's life, it is still possible to build a bond of love with God in the dimension of parent and child. Bluntly speaking, I think abstention is better than immorality. It is not the best way, but it could open up a way for God's love and power to begin a recreation process inside of ourselves.