Is God against homosexuality?

[Phil Ayesho]

Actually many Christians refer to God by the name of God. In fact that is a phrase: In the name of God.
People pray "Dear God" or say "Thank you God" think of the name being used as either a formal name or a nickname.
I'm a Christian and have never called God 'Yahweh' or 'Jehovah' or 'Abba' or 'El Shaddai'

According to some sources the different names people use for God are related to aspects of God's character, therefore God is the main name and the others are more about aspects of God's way of thinking/doing things.

That is actually a Hindu thing… the concept of a God that has different names as different manifestations of Godhead.


The Christian polytheism is more directly correlated to the Roman Pantheism that Christianity supplanted.

Christianity is a Polytheists' interpretation of Judaism. That is… the Romans never were comfortable with the idea of a singular God… because in their worldview there was just way too much going on for a single entity to explain.

So Roman Christians invented Satan to handle evil, they invented angels as God's henchmen, they invented the Trinity to further divide God into three separate manifestations, and they followed that up by inventing the demigods that they called Saints…. each to handle their own narrow focus of divine influence.

For any thinking person modern Christianity is clearly a hodgepodge cobbled together out of different belief systems that were in direct conflict.

Either there is just ONE god… that can handle EVERYTHING ( including the evil he must have created and be equally responsible for )

Or there is a panoply of somewhat more minor magical characters that divvy up the various tasks of divinity so that we can have good guys and bad guys.


The only purpose for Satan is to exculpate God from the evil in the world… ( so we far more moral human beings can't blame him for the bad shit. )

But in fact, any omniscient all powerful creator must have understood that Satan would become evil… had the power to create him otherwise, and chose to create him that way, anyway, because it was his full intention that Satan be exactly what he became.

Ergo… there is no reasonable beliefs system in which a singular all knowing creator can escape absolute responsibility for everything in the world. Including evil.

God would HAVE to be every bit as much HATE as he is LOVE… else hate would not exist.


This reveals that beliefs about God are nonsensical… and believers wave away the nonsense with incantation about God's 'ways' being 'mysterious'… but what they really mean is that the idea of God, itself, makes no sense.

Human beings can not conceive of a God that makes sense because the concept itself is incompatible with reason and sense. Thus is why all beliefs about God are provably self defeating.

There can be NO God that can reasonably act as a 'moral authority' because any God must be equally responsible for ALL immorality, And no creator can Judge their creations when their creations are the artifacts of their perfectly executed intention.


Christianity was invented by Goyim who could not quite wrap their heads around the Jewish Concept of a single God.
ANd the Jews themselves had only recently stopped believing in God having a "wife"… which makes him not really a solitary God.


Learn the history of faith and faith becomes a lot less mystical and a lot more obvious in its function as a power structure.

Who cares what you Call your imaginary friend?
Santa Claus, by any other name, still smells like pure horseshit.

 

[Joegrant43]

If you read the bible that man has written it's a mix bunch of messages. I would think a God would not be against things he created (if he exists in the sense that we humans have conjured up).

 

[622675]

Phil,

There are lots of interesting observations in your response to Hoss #341 (permalink)

But the capital G – God made it clear that even the best human thinking and rationalizations couldn’t track along with what he was up to.

So at some point you just have to get on the bus and hope it takes you to a better place or plan to stay at the station with what little you think you know.

Isaiah 55:8
“For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,” declares the Lord .

 

[Fuzzy_]

Ditto. Add that people continue to spell god with an upper case g.

God is a proper noun, just like Satan. Proper nouns are generally capitalized.

 

[halcyondays]

God is a proper noun, just like Satan. Proper nouns are generally capitalized.

God is a common noun, not a proper noun or formal name, so not capitalized. Devil is a common noun but not a proper noun or formal name. Satan is a formal name for a devil, so spelled with a upper case S, but it's incorrect to use an upper case D and refer to him as Devil. Same goes for god.

Only the formal names gods, goddesses, devils, angels and other mythological characters are capitalized.

If your god is Yahweh, say so. Don't assume your reader knows.

 

[kingdong9]

No idea, why don't you ask him? Oh, hold on, you can't do that as he doesn't exist. Tough one for you?

 

[brinzaulsschwul]

As there is no such thing as god he, she or it cannot possibly be against homosexual men or women nor can it, she or he be against bisexuals or trans people. That silly book written by MEN was to control the population and keep women as slaves and allow all those catholic peadophile priests to hide behind that 'good book' - ridiculous

Brinz

 

[Silvertip]

... Agnosticism is a concrete and absolute philosophical position that EVERYTHING ANYONE claims about God is, by definition, false.
This means that all beliefs about God are inherently wrong ...

That is complete and utter bullshit!

After a lifetime spent doing good scientific research one thing that I have learned is that it is simply human hubris that makes humans believe that we know a great deal. In truth, all of mankind combined knows very little.

I am an agnostic, which only means that I don't have faith in any religion. But I cannot say that any religion is wrong because that is beyond human comprehension. My logic tells me that essentially all religions derive their foundations from providing an answer to the unknown; from the lightning, thunder and fire gods of primitive religions to the questions of the hereafter in our current religions. That can certainly be cause for skepticism about the existence of a god but it falls far short of proving that no such superior being exists. The simple truth is that gods, the soul and the hereafter are all far beyond the boundaries of human knowledge and probably always will be.

 

[deleted871301]

im a christian man and recently discovered that im gay as well. but ive been raised to believe God is against homosexuality. any views or experience on this?

Humans are against homosexuality... not God...

 

[bearvwe]

As God is a figment of your imagination you can decide whether He is for or against anything.

 

[hotcockalex]

Humans are against homosexuality... not God...

Nice one! :smile:

 

[rbkwp]

a good thing is a true believer does not have a need nor desire to try and convince a non believer

a belief in God
a belief in Homosexuality

just let it lie is cool enough ..

 

[Novaboy]

As God is a figment of your imagination you can decide whether He is for or against anything.

Why doesn't LPSG have a "like" button like Facebook?!

 

[ConanTheBarber]

God is a common noun, not a proper noun or formal name, so not capitalized. Devil is a common noun but not a proper noun or formal name.

You're right, you're wrong.
'God,' as a matter of fact, is almost always capitalized, if you are speaking, as people often do, of the creator of everything (whose existence is not one of my assumptions, but the subject here is general usage).
You can use the lower case when speaking of any of the panoply of gods (there, I've done it) that people have believed in, in which case 'god' is a common noun; but most references to the supposed creator of everything include a capitalized spelling. This is general usage. To fight this is to fight the wind.
Similarly, with references to 'the Devil.' It is treated as a proper noun, with a capitalized 'D.'
Now, I can call someone 'a little devil,' and not capitalize it -- but the indefinite article gives away its status, in this case, as a common noun.

 

[Neller]

This thread is a good example of how atheists/agnostics ruin any discussion of God or religion. The premise of the original question assumes the existence of God, or at least the idea of God. Whether God actually exists doesn't matter for the purposes of the question. God as an idea certainly exists.

All of the atheist/agnostic responses that dismiss the question are like if your English teacher asked you what Hamlet thought about something and you answered "Hamlet isn't real so can't have any thoughts". That's not a valid answer to the teacher's question. Your teacher would rightly fail you if you gave that as a response on a test. All of literature would be pointless if we couldn't give thoughts and feelings and ideas to fictional creations.

Try thinking about the question without dismissing it. It's a fun exercise even if you don't believe in God and can maybe help you understand other people better.

 

[ConanTheBarber]

This thread is a good example of how atheists/agnostics ruin any discussion of God or religion. The premise of the original question assumes the existence of God, or at least the idea of God. Whether God actually exists doesn't matter for the purposes of the question. God as an idea certainly exists.

All of the atheist/agnostic responses that dismiss the question are like if your English teacher asked you what Hamlet thought about something and you answered "Hamlet isn't real so can't have any thoughts". That's not a valid answer to the teacher's question. Your teacher would rightly fail you if you gave that as a response on a test. All of literature would be pointless if we couldn't give thoughts and feelings and ideas to fictional creations.

Try thinking about the question without dismissing it. It's a fun exercise even if you don't believe in God and can maybe help you understand other people better.

Then the question becomes absurd: "Is the idea of God against homosexuality?"
The OP's question is about the world and not a text.
If the question had been, "Is the God we see portrayed in the Bible against homosexuality," then your parallel with Hamlet would be valid.

The OP's full post was as follows:

im a christian man and recently discovered that im gay as well. but ive been raised to believe God is against homosexuality. any views or experience on this?

I don't see how that can be answered if the existence of 'God' is in question. If 'He' doesn't exist, there is nothing to describe, nothing to apply predicates to.

 

[craig_uk]

This thread is a good example of how atheists/agnostics ruin any discussion of God or religion. The premise of the original question assumes the existence of God, or at least the idea of God. Whether God actually exists doesn't matter for the purposes of the question. God as an idea certainly exists.

All of the atheist/agnostic responses that dismiss the question are like if your English teacher asked you what Hamlet thought about something and you answered "Hamlet isn't real so can't have any thoughts". That's not a valid answer to the teacher's question. Your teacher would rightly fail you if you gave that as a response on a test. All of literature would be pointless if we couldn't give thoughts and feelings and ideas to fictional creations.

Try thinking about the question without dismissing it. It's a fun exercise even if you don't believe in God and can maybe help you understand other people better.

Actually this thread is a prime example of what rational, reasoned, caring people have to put up with. This forum, not just this thread, contains a lot of references to guilt and most of that would seem to be down to a religion rather than rationality.

It is very clear that the mythical deity described in the Christian bible hates women and approves of slavery, thinks people who have ever worked on a Sunday or worn a polyester/cotton mix should die and that both eating shrimp and a man lying with a man is an abomination. He loves blood sacrifices, genocide and baby killing.

If anyboy really wanted to know what the god of their bible thinks then they should probbaly take a bit of time and read their bible rather than feel guilty or worse still share their guilt or seek opinions on a website dedicated to big cocks. Most Christians have clearly not read their bible in its entirety. Like any terms and conditions, especially the important ones, perhaps they should.

Once they realise how fucked up and rediculous their bronze age book is maybe a homosexual won't any longer need to feel guilty about what they do with their own body and just maybe others would hate or judge a little less.

 

[chrysler fanatic]

Actually this thread is a prime example of what rational, reasoned, caring people have to put up with. This forum, not just this thread, contains a lot of references to guilt and most of that would seem to be down to a religion rather than rationality.

It is very clear that the mythical deity described in the Christian bible hates women and approves of slavery, thinks people who have ever worked on a Sunday or worn a polyester/cotton mix should die and that both eating shrimp and a man lying with a man is an abomination. He loves blood sacrifices, genocide and baby killing.

If anyboy really wanted to know what the god of their bible thinks then they should probbaly take a bit of time and read their bible rather than feel guilty or worse still share their guilt or seek opinions on a website dedicated to big cocks. Most Christians have clearly not read their bible in its entirety. Like any terms and conditions, especially the important ones, perhaps they should.

Once they realise how fucked up and rediculous their bronze age book is maybe a homosexual won't any longer need to feel guilty about what they do with their own body and just maybe others would hate or judge a little less.

Have you read the Bible? You correctly point out lots of Old Testament stories, but it is important to take these in context. In Galations, the Apostle Paul points out the Jewish law was our "guardian" or more simply translated it was our babysitter. It was designed to whip mankind into attention and reverence toward God until such time as He chose to reveal truth to us.

All twelve Apostles called Jesus, "Rabbi" which means teacher. And Jesus taught that the law was no longer the authority. This made the Jewish leadership furious, and they persecuted Jesus for it. And that is the point that the Apostle Paul points out in Galations and Acts. The law existed for thousands of years for the purpose of Jesus changing it.

It is also important to note that many of the stories should not be taken literally and Paul points out in his letters that many of these Old Testament stories are figurative. Many Christians believe every word to its literal meaning, but to do that means one ignores the point of the book.

It is sad, really, that so many Christians make fools of themselves and their religion by adhering to Old Testament rules that Jesus said himself were no longer our "guardian".

 

[malakos]

Yep... You have clearly explained that myths are fictional, as well as entertaining... We love entertainment, don't we?

Now, back to the OP's question.

Did you even read what I wrote? Fiction is intentionally imaginary. Myths are tales intending to explain reality.

 

[malakos]

This is the apologists typical response, but it is a load of crap. The Old Testament does not just say it is an arbitrary rule not to do these things (such as eat shellfish, catfish, shark, etc.) so Jesus can make some new arbitrary rules. It says it is an abomination, and unclean. Why is it suddenly not unclean and not an abomination?

Actually, if you read through several of these prohibitions in the OT, you will start to notice a pattern of "this will be unclean FOR YOU". Who is the "you" being spoken of? The participants in the given covenant. What was the given covenant in Leviticus? The Mosaic Covenant. Who were the participants in it? Those who followed Moses in the Exodus. Essentially the portion of Israelites who settled Canaan.

So what does that have to do with Gentile Christians? Simple: nothing practical. It is a matter of heritage and history.