Homosexuality: What is God's real view?

Post Reply New Topic

I don't think God cares nearly as much as everyone thinks he does. I mean why would he?

This is an inaccurate statement. A false assumption can still lead to a given logical conclusion, unless you're going to throw in other unproved assumptions as well. For instance, let us debate the very question you asked, "If my grandmother had balls, would she be my grandfather?"

Now, the possession of testicles may imply the ability to father a child, assuming that said testes are accompanied by a penis. However, the term used to describe the ancestor is "grandmother", implying that said ancestor gave birth to one of your parents. This implies that the grandparent in question is either hermaphroditic or a post-op transsexual (depending on whether the testes the grandparent has are real or implants). If hermaphroditic, did the grandparent impregnate itself? (This seems unlikely, as such a severe case of inbreeding would likely result in some rather non-viable offspring.)

Now, if Grandma is hermaphroditic, and carried you to term, then s/he would not be your grandfather, but your grandmother, as familial relationships are not defined by one's organs. However, if s/he used hir penis to impregnate a normal woman, then s/he would indeed be your grandfather.

As you can see, even the most nonsensical proposition can be discussed logically, and its premises and possible outcomes examined. When the discussion is carried on with fairly-rigorous logic, this forms the basis of modern science fiction.

This is a loaded question because people bend the bible to support whatever their viewpoints are. But make no mistake there is a passages that specifically labels homosexuality and denounces it: Romans 1:24-28

King James Version

Young's Literal Translation


Darby Translation


And more: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se ... ersion=16;

Notice that in all three (and any other translations) after homosexuality is identified the passage ends with God giving them up to a disapproved mental state. Homosexuality is actually given a medical diagnosis. A "disapproved mental state." I don't know how any could misinterpret that.

One could argue "the Bible is old" and of course this is true, however the Bible's age doesn't negate the fact that it is observed by, according to Wikipedia "As of the early 21st century, Christianity has between 1.5 billion and 2.1 billion adherents, representing about a quarter to a third of the world's population and is the world's largest religion." Even if you account for all the sects within Christianity that passage in Romans alone is the primary driving force behind the reasons WHY Christians believe what they believe.

You can take this anyway you wish, but if this is new to you... well, now you know.

Ummm...

Just exactly how does

"change the natural use into that which is against nature", "change the natural use into that against nature" or "changed the natural use into that contrary to nature"

indicate Lesbianisim?

More likely it is describing Penile Fellatio or Anal Penetration.

Paul was about as likely to have written about "two spinster ladies" as he was to have seen them in action...

I really hate how people use Paul as justification for things his god never mentioned...

(I'm about to break out my Greek Interlinear here and get all Jesuit Jinky...)

The original word that was used by Paul was arsenokoit which was rarely ever used to talk about homosexuality and never referred to loving committed relationships between two consenting same sex lovers.


arsenokoit was often used in the context of
pederasty- that is a younger male often a young teenager in an erotic relationship with an adult male.
rape
murder
bareing false witness
thievery

Also Arsenokoit is sometimes translated into sodomite however sodomite doesn't mean homosexual it means shrine prostitute, like those found in Sodom, and in the temples of Cybele the Roman fertility goddess.

So god never had a problem with two people of the same sex in a loving, committed monogamous relationship.

There you go. Thank you. I didn't think I was the only one who had access to the Greek... I just don' have access to my books right now.

I appreciate the lookup.

It is true. Write up a truth table. You will find F -> F is T and F -> T is T. A false proposition implies any proposition. Which is why we reject inconsistent system.

ruveyn

It you take the Catholic view, God real view is that Priests should bugger Altar Boys.

ruveyn

God has never told me his view on homosexuality so I don't quite know.

well you either feel a kind of natural revulsion for things like sodomy or you don't. I believe god said he would enscribe doctrine on people's hearts (Isaiah) because he got sick of exactly the sort of holier than thou, self righteous stuff going on in this thread and also, I think he got sick of endless intellectualism/debate of belief. If you don't feel repulsed by it, then there's no need for you to justify it. Personally, I am repulsed.

As for christian homosexuals, I don't believe the bible has any proscription on lesbianism as another poster noted, but in any case, no one has bought up the notion of deception here and everyone seems to think that every thought and impulse that enters into their mind is their own. I don't think that. The whole notion of 'self' is dubious to me, and I think you do have to 'die to self' to make the grade.

I don't think everyone can be 'saved', nor do they want to be. It's a choice. You make your choice according to what you think god will find acceptable, one usually does this based on the bible or long established practices or what is in your 'heart', or some combination of all 3. If you want to believe god finds sodomy acceptable, that's your choice. You find out whether you were right at some stage later on. I will be judged by how I have conducted myself, so will everyone. Make your choice.

Last edited by Postperson on 05 Mar 2009, 4:12 am, edited 1 time in total.

Yes, there is an evolutionary reason for men to have sex with men when woman are not available. It provides a sexual outlet for men. Usually boys are taken along with soldiers in ancient days as pages and cabin boys. They are just as soft but don't menstruate. It is also good practice for when one day a man does have a chance at a woman, his prostrate is strong and healthy, and he is able to penetrate and fertilize a woman.

You are right, that for true gay men, it is more than just a sexual function. It is also a social and inter feeling. But many gay men like to be with straight men, and even seek them out for the sexual gratification. Another evolutionary aspect of gay men, is that they are practice for straight men. Oral and anal practice lengthens and enlarges the penis, strengthens the prostate, and increases endurance of the man. Which in turn, increases his fertility with a woman.

In high school, I had several straight friends who enjoyed the interaction but are not gay, they did it because they enjoyed the act and it helped them mature and perform better with the woman they would be with later.

god condemns male prostitutes and gay men, but doesn't condemn lesbians and female prostitutes?
...
yet another proof that the bible was written by a man.

Assuming Mickey Mouse really exists, what is his real preference for eating strawberry ice cream with potato chips?

LOL good one ^_^

Anyways the reason their is nothing about lesbians is because those who decided to edit the bible were indeed men. These men were repulsed by men having sex with other men but like many men today they have no problem with two women having sex. Also the bible was against female prostitutes as well, but of course that which sickened those editing the bible got the harshest words.

Not against homosexual. I believe those questions should be asked to acquire a better understanding. Any question or descussion that doen't explain the survival benefits, generally describing not explaining it.

Example: explaining evolutionary advantage of a cat having sharp clews, you should be able to explain why wolves and other dogs based creatures do not have any. Without and understanding of the laws of evolution this is difficult.

Maybe I should have reworded it
* What are the evolutionary advantages for the individual or the collective for being gay.
* What are the evolutionary advantages of persecuting gay pay people.

Making comparisons between human and animals is a very good start dude.

QFT.

I asked one guy who was into lesbian porn why he was such a homophobe and the only excuse he had is that it was against the bible.

Then I brought up the porn and he got all defensive like there was nothing wrong with it...