Sexual preference is un-Godlike

[Sunstone]

**MOD POST**

Please stick to the topic in the OP: The sexual preferences of deity.


​

 

[Sonic247]

Gods a guy and I'm going to sleep.............. now. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ...

 

[nutshell]

I thought Mormons believed that Jesus was not always perfect but had to grow into perfection, and that we do too and can become Gods.

No. Jesus has always been perfect and he has been with God since the beginning.

 

[nutshell]

And...sticking with the OP...LDS believe God and Jesus are male.

 

[Sunstone]

No. Jesus has always been perfect and he has been with God since the beginning.

That's nice, Nutshell, but what has it to do with the OP?

 

[nutshell]

That's nice, Nutshell, but what has it to do with the OP?

That in the beginning there were a bunch of males...

I wonder where the females were???:sarcastic

 

[Ozzie]

**MOD POST**

Please stick to the topic in the OP: The sexual preferences of deity.


​

Close to the money. Actually the topic of the OP was why God should care.

 

[Willamena]

Yet this is what othodozy does in replacing personal sexual preference with orthodox preference. I realise I may have put my foot in my mouth about what desirable qualities of God are, yet this is my personal choice as is my sexual preference.

This is what orthodoxy does by replacing the meaningful story with the literal one.

I believe that God is a masculine being. He is reffered to as Father in the Bible. God made MALE and FEMALE. Made Adam from his own image and Eve from Adam.

...like so.

 

[Ozzie]

This is what orthodoxy does by replacing the meaningful story with the literal one.


...like so.

Doesn't this show that blasphemy is entirely idiosyncratic, yet literal?

 

[Willamena]

Doesn't this show that blasphemy is entirely idiosyncratic, yet literal?

I don't whatfor from blasphemy; it's certainly wrong to me to rob a story of its meaning.

 

[sojourner]

If God is genderless,

God is not genderless. God is both genders.

 

[sojourner]

He not only says homosexuality is sin, but also many other things are sin. You must repent from sin and ask for forgiveness. The people choosing this lifestyle are constantly slapping God in the face daily by choosing this sin over and over and over. If I was a thief or an adulterer I would not enter the kingdom of God either. The point is that we choose Christ over our fleshly desires.

Theft and adultery are selfish actions. Loving another human being is a selfless action. These are not comparable.
What if you were a child of God?

 

[sojourner]

This topic is really just TRIVIAL. It doesn't matter what gender he is. I believe in what the Bible says and it says we were created in his image and woman from us. I believe their will be male and female in heaven and the Lord will be male. But everyone has their own beliefs. You are entitled to yours. I get my beliefs from the Bible.

I don't believe any of this, and I "get my beliefs" from the Bible, too.

 

[sojourner]

to lizkid: God's word is forever settled in heaven, he is the one who preserves it. He wouldn't refer to himself as being male to try and please a patriarichal society. If he comprimised like that then he never would be crucified, and all the prophets were hated for telling the truth. Because the world doesn't want to hear the truth but that never stopped God from saying it.

As far as I'm aware, God doesn't name God's self "Father." That's a relationship that's recognized by human beings.

 

[Quoth The Raven]

It's not good to take that much liberty in an interpretation though. Prounouns are specific about whether they refer to male and female. If someone wants to worship a genderless God they shouldn't try to pretend it is the God of the Bible.

What was the original language the document was written in? Was it a language that assigns gender to words? If so, does it then follow that all beds in France are in fact male, because the language assigns them a gender?
Let us suppose for a moment that the bible is in fact divinely inspired...were all subsequent translations also divinely inspired, or did god then just leave the people with the relevent linguistic skills to hash it out for themselves?
You're not even allowing for the fact that divinely inspired or not, it was people who wrote it - unless by inspired you mean that god dropped the whole thing fully transcribed on the publishers desk himself - and people have to work within concepts they understand.
As to the actual topic of the thread, it seems to me that if god is in the business of gay bashing, it has an awful lot to do with that nasty habit he has of forcing people to go against their nature in orer to gain acceptance...regardless of whether what they're actually doing is actually wrong or not.
Loving people is fine, so someone said. Then went on to say that lust is wrong and there's a difference. Thanks so much for the heads up on that score...we needed that light shone on our painful ignorance.
How about you look to that nasty thing in your eye before it festers, and don't presume that other people operate entirely based on lust because you have such a limited concept of and ability to love.