God and homosexuality.

[leov]

Where does this opinion come from?

I had some time to read, listen, meditate, think...

 

[SkepticThinker]

I did brush off it, my opinion of spiritual matters is largely individual. I stick to my .

So, in other words, that's what you believe and you're sticking to it, despite all evidence to the contrary?

 

[SkepticThinker]

LOL. Then God created serial killers, the Russian gulags, AIDS, car accidents, and house fires.

Hey, you're the one claiming God(s) created everything.
If God(s) created heterosexuality, then it follows that "he" also created homosexuality and bisexuality.

Since you are unfamiliar with the theological facts of the matter, and apparently are unfamiliar with the Bible....................I can say with total confidence that you don´t know what you are talking about.

I am fairly familiar with the Bible, having read it all the way through a couple of times, and being a former Christian. But this is irrelevant to the point (both yours and mine).
How about you try responding to what I said? You're making claims about the mind of a God that you haven't demonstrated even exists in the first place, as though they were factual and real. Diverting to the Bible doesn't help you with that because the Bible doesn't demonstrate the existence of God(s) either.

 

[SkepticThinker]

May be you should read this more carefully. It is only a start.

I read it all the way through. Did you?
Perhaps you could point out the important parts that you think I missed, that would back up your opinions.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I had some time to read, listen, meditate, think...

So from yourself; your own mind. Not from any god(s). Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[leov]

So, in other words, that's what you believe and you're sticking to it, despite all evidence to the contrary?

What evidence? Literal reading?

 

[Goodman John]

Okay, we can agree that in the Old Testament is an injunction from God against homosexuality, incurring the death penalty if the pair is discovered. God hates gays. Got it.

But in the Old Testament we also find that God hates shrimp, so make of that what you will.

It's stuff like this that just reinforces my belief that 'God' in the OT isn't God at all.

 

[leov]

Okay, we can agree that in the Old Testament is an injunction from God against homosexuality, incurring the death penalty if the pair is discovered. God hates gays. Got it.

But in the Old Testament we also find that God hates shrimp, so make of that what you will.

It's stuff like this that just reinforces my belief that 'God' in the OT isn't God at all.

Also do not forget the flood...

 

[Phaedrus]

Okay, we can agree that in the Old Testament is an injunction from God against homosexuality, incurring the death penalty if the pair is discovered. God hates gays. Got it.

But in the Old Testament we also find that God hates shrimp, so make of that what you will.

It's stuff like this that just reinforces my belief that 'God' in the OT isn't God at all.

You have to understand that Levitical Law is meant for the Jews. Not for Christians.

 

[viole]

You have to understand that Levitical Law is meant for the Jews. Not for Christians.

I cannot imagine Woody Allen stoning some Wall Mart worker on Saturdays.

Ciao

- viole

 

[leov]

You have to understand that Levitical Law is meant for the Jews. Not for Christians.

Jews in a way was a control group.

 

[columbus]

Okay, we can agree that in the Old Testament is an injunction from God against homosexuality, incurring the death penalty if the pair is discovered. God hates gays. Got it.

No, actually the threat is only leveled against males.
Tom

 

[SkepticThinker]

What evidence? Literal reading?

Have you not been reading along in the thread?

None of the "evidence" you think you've presented has backed up any of your claims, as several posters have pointed out. In fact, much of it has contradicted your claims. And yet you continue to hold the same opinion. Hence the reason I said that.

 

[leov]

Have you not been reading along in the thread?

None of the "evidence" you think you've presented has backed up any of your claims, as several posters have pointed out. In fact, much of it has contradicted your claims. And yet you continue to hold the same opinion. Hence the reason I said that.

I do not see it this way. What is my OP is about? Do you really understand it?

 

[Goodman John]

You have to understand that Levitical Law is meant for the Jews. Not for Christians.

NO, I fully understand this, and on various forums over the years I have railed against Christians who use Jewish law to justify Christian points of view.

Now, in the case of the injunction against homosexuals I don't for one minute extend that past the Jews- their law, their thing. My concern, though, is that the act is called an 'abomination'.... but elsewhere, the law forbids eating shrimp, too, because THEY are an 'abomination'. And then we see examples of pretty odd laws- no cloth woven of different kinds of thread? Really?

It's things like this that lead me to think the laws weren't laid down 'for their own good', but rather as a test to see just how much shenanigans and micromanagement the Jews would take. 'No Murdering' makes sense as a law, but 'No Shrimp' seems like it's just jerking the Jews around for no apparent reason.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

NO, I fully understand this, and on various forums over the years I have railed against Christians who use Jewish law to justify Christian points of view.

Now, in the case of the injunction against homosexuals I don't for one minute extend that past the Jews- their law, their thing. My concern, though, is that the act is called an 'abomination'.... but elsewhere, the law forbids eating shrimp, too, because THEY are an 'abomination'. And then we see examples of pretty odd laws- no cloth woven of different kinds of thread? Really?

It's things like this that lead me to think the laws weren't laid down 'for their own good', but rather as a test to see just how much shenanigans and micromanagement the Jews would take. 'No Murdering' makes sense as a law, but 'No Shrimp' seems like it's just jerking the Jews around for no apparent reason.

Levitical laws were for the priests to enforce ritual purity. That's why they're so concerned with petty minutiae. The Levites are the Hebrew priestly tribe. Most of those laws weren't for the general populace as priests would be held to a higher standard of purity. So it's pretty dumb how Christians cherry pick them, taking them out of context.

 

[leov]

NO, I fully understand this, and on various forums over the years I have railed against Christians who use Jewish law to justify Christian points of view.

Now, in the case of the injunction against homosexuals I don't for one minute extend that past the Jews- their law, their thing. My concern, though, is that the act is called an 'abomination'.... but elsewhere, the law forbids eating shrimp, too, because THEY are an 'abomination'. And then we see examples of pretty odd laws- no cloth woven of different kinds of thread? Really?

It's things like this that lead me to think the laws weren't laid down 'for their own good', but rather as a test to see just how much shenanigans and micromanagement the Jews would take. 'No Murdering' makes sense as a law, but 'No Shrimp' seems like it's just jerking the Jews around for no apparent reason.

I see God-Sons of Israel relationship a sort of scientific experiment where Sons of Israel were a control group. Experiment in designing of collective unconscious using largely bicameral Earth population.

 

[leov]

So from yourself; your own mind. Not from any god(s). Thanks for clearing that up.

It was a combination. It started with Scriptures and many questions why, not just "because I said so", I found rational.
I had proof that things not that 'material' as I was told in my Alma Mater...

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

What is most disturbing to me about this whole thread is the way homosexuality is reduced to male homosexuality, and male homosexuality is reduced to butt sex.

PSA - Gay men are human beings with relationships and sex lives that are just as nuanced, complex, emotional, and fulfilling as anyone else's. We're not amoral f*** machines.

Also PSA - Lesbians exist. They're also human (see above).

Twenty-five years of my lover, and no, we're not having butt sex any more. But we're still in love, still together, still supporting each other in our dotage.

My lover has, over the last 2 1/2 years, spent 8 1/2 months in hospital, and the last 18 months working through physiotherapy to get some of what he lost back. And no, that doesn't include a lot of sex (or any, really). But also --- don't ever forget it --- it still includes the love that makes us lovers, partners, husband and husband, however you want to say it.

The fact is, sex is important, it's often really good, it's sometimes a chore. But in life-long relationships, it also sometimes just kind of falls away, becomes less important, doesn't matter as much as the quiet chat after dinner, or holding hands watching a Shakespeare play or a Broadway show.

What's important is the love...the connection

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Twenty-five years of my lover, and no, we're not having butt sex any more. But we're still in love, still together, still supporting each other in our dotage.

My lover has, over the last 2 1/2 years, spent 8 1/2 months in hospital, and the last 18 months working through physiotherapy to get some of what he lost back. And no, that doesn't include a lot of sex (or any, really). But also --- don't ever forget it --- it still includes the love that makes us lovers, partners, husband and husband, however you want to say it.

The fact is, sex is important, it's often really good, it's sometimes a chore. But in life-long relationships, it also sometimes just kind of falls away, becomes less important, doesn't matter as much as the quiet chat after dinner, or holding hands watching a Shakespeare play or a Broadway show.

What's important is the love...the connection

Thanks for this post. I think it's something a lot of people need to read.