Gays arent evil-why does god dissaprove

the other argument on this has gone on for ever and way off track, so I thought I'd ask if anyone can tell me why- If it's immoral to sleep with men, why do I want to? That is not a choice I made. For a very long time I have wanted to be completely straight. I never wanted any part of gay, and in fact would still quite like to trade up for normality- that just isn't possible. If god made me. He programmed me with gayness. My free will lets me choose to act on it or not, but gayness is inate. You can scan brains for masculinity or feminity. Gay people are generally more opposite orientated in their very DNA. I can't get blamed for that surely!

So does god expect me to live a lie for ever and be deeply unhappy while I smile and pretend everything is fine to my wife?

I met a christian guy in a chatroom once who did just that. His advise was literally-lie, get a wife, you gotta get to heaven

Or should I live alone forever, guiltily repenting for my dirty sinful thoughts?

Theres that bit about coveting another guys wife or whatever, which I have been taught means that you can't think about sinning without feeling guilty and apologising, otherwise you might as well have sinned.

So am I supposed to coninually repent for stuff so ingrained in who I am that I can't control it? Thats sick, anyone who seriously tried to deal with christian guilt while gay forever would go crazy, having lived such a self-loathing miserable life. If you really beleived your thoughts were unholy, disliked by the divine creator, and were condemning you, and you couldn't stop them, death would be better.

I'm not a bad person, I abide by my concience. I don't think god should lay this stuff on me or anyone. Can anyone who beleives the bible justify this, without contradicting the bible?

 

dont worry god isnt real, live your life the way you want.

 

do whatever, man, it's your life. if you feel guilty, it's kinda your own issue.

 

Yeah, I'm not Christian, I no longer have a "guilt issue" but by the standards of this forum branch I'm SUPPOSED to be repentant. That was the point. I want one christian answer. Gay is wrong. So, what exactly does god wan't me to do~?

 

Repent, be baptized in his name, and he will baptize you with his Holy Spirit. That is what he desires for all of us.

Asking what to do but not really being interested in Christ will not help. I cannot tell you what God says to do and expect you to wake up tomorrow and decide you like the opposite sex. For one, you have to feel conviction from the Lord in your own heart. For two, until you experience God, what he says will not make any sense. It will not be until you develop a personal relationship with him, that he guides you in his reasons.

 

God has never said anything against gay folks -the people who attempt to speak for him do. But as far as I know none of them has ever sat down and spoken to God directly, either, to make sure they got everything straight. The bible is ancient, it's hard to trust exactly what is written down in there. It's been translated many times, and before that much was passed on by word of mouth. I'm sure people added their own prejudices and preferences to it when they had a chance. (Please don't say 'priests or monks wouldn't do that' -sure not all would.. but some... priests aren't gods or angels themselves, there are frequent news reports about priests who go wrong in one way or another)

Also, I believe a good lot of the rules and laws from the bible are rules and laws that make sense, or did make sense once but may be outdated now. If you just say 'don't steal' there'll always be some people who say 'says who?' and who just don't care if the rest of society dislikes their behaviour. Saying 'don't steal or you will burn in hell for eternity' is a lot more effective, even now and certainly in a more superstitious society. I suspect a lot of *people* added their own rules to those of God, just because it made it a lot easier to get other people to listen to them. Or perhaps God did make those rules, because he couldn't possibly explain the underlying reasons to the people of the time (try explaining why you shouldn't marry your sister/brother to someone who has *no* clue about genetics and why incest may cause genetic diseases... God may be almighthy but I think even he would have found it much easier to say 'if you do it you'll go to hell' ).

And yes, banning homosexuality made sense hundreds, thousands of years ago, up until quite recently really. There was no life insurance, no homes for the elderly, no medicare. When you got old, your children had to take care of you, and if you didn't have any children you either died or it fell upon the rest of the community to take care of you. Homosexual couples have a bit of a problem producing children (not counting arrangements with others -back then, it would've been quite hard to find a surrogate mom). So, older homosexuals could quite likely become a burden to the community. People didn't want that to happen, and like I mentioned before, claiming 'you will burn in hell for eternity' was lots easier than explaining the whole thing and hope the gay couple in question would see reason.

 

There's no agreement among Christians about this issue. Some as you say, condem, and think it better to live a lie than accept reality. Others are quite open to the idea that gay people are ok - look at the controversy over the Anglican gay bishop recently - there's a gay person who has made it to the top in church terms.

Its more catholics on one hand and right-wing evangelicals etc. on the other who are against gays.

 

"god" isn't the one making the rules here, men are.
dont listen to others, live your life the way you want, cos if God existed, It would want you to live a happy life.
That's why i dont buy the religious shit...who can guarantee 100% evidence that God is the one that says this or that?
who can prove that God is some sort of dictator, who'll punish you sending you to hell cos you're gay?
sorry to be so sarcastic, but no-one has ever come up with a convincing answer.

 

i'm a christian, i answered you. your "sin" (which i think was just inserted by homophobe legalists in the OT) is no worse than me thinking "wrathful" thoughts about my mother-in-law. it's all the same. just because you don't think it's wrong doesn't really mean anything. i do a lot of shit that's technically wrong but is such an ingrained part of my animal nature that i can't stop. do i blame god because i enjoy it but it's not part of his higher order? nope. waste of time. it's why christ was sent.

 

Enacting your wrathful thoughts against your mother in law, can only be taken to mean violent or at least mallicious acts against her.

Enacting my "sinful" thoughts means finding a partner to share life with.

Sorry if I contest that comparison, but can you find an impulse in your animal nature to compare it with that doesn't hurt anyone?

 

P.S. If you think stuff was added by homophobes into the O.T. then how can you have faith in any of it? How can you trust the "word of god" that guides your whole life, if you admit you think it's been altered by men with alterior motives? Doesn't that completely undermine your religion?

 

the first count would be my desire to have sex with men and women other than my husband. that's surely an animal impulse. the point of the wrathful thoughts is that i can't do anything about them. the point is, anything outside of perfect order or spirituality is a sin. we CAN'T HELP IT. i can't tell you that i'm going to give up my religion because there are rules against things i like or sometimes even need. that's petulant and childish.

and no, understanding that the bible is a work touched by the hands of man doesn't negate it's truth. by reading it in context, in prayer, in study with the spirit it's truth and relevancy are revealed. i'm not a biblical literalist, never have been. i'm not one that thinks that it's undiluted from god's word to the writers' pen. people have a tendency to filter things through their own consciousness. but one constant is man's inability to be perfect, and god's willingness to provide for that anyway.

 

There is a lot of debate among christians about this. I have posted the following letter before, but (flaws acknoledged) I think it is interesting and pertinent:

Here is an intersting letter I found written to Dr.Laura:

Dear Dr. Laura,

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's law. I have learned a great deal from you, and I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind him that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific laws and how to best follow them.

When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev. 1:9). The problem is my neighbors.They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. How should I deal with this?

I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as it suggests in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev. 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

Lev. 25:44 states that I may buy slaves from the nations that are around us. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans but not Canadians. Can you clarify?

I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination (Lev. 10:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

Lev. 20:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging

 

Quote: So am I supposed to coninually repent for stuff so ingrained in who I am that I can't control it? Thats sick, anyone who seriously tried to deal with christian guilt while gay forever would go crazy, having lived such a self-loathing miserable life. If you really beleived your thoughts were unholy, disliked by the divine creator, and were condemning you, and you couldn't stop them, death would be better.

Um, I believe most of my rhoughts are unholy and disliked by the creator....and I'm not gay. I struggle with the sin nature that I inherited from Adam and Eve, when they decided to go their own way and basically hand God a divorce. That manifests in different ways. Maybe you are gay. Maybe I struggle with temptation to have sex before marriage. Maybe guy down the street is tempted to steal a bunch of crap. The point is that if you have faith in the Bible as the explicit word of God, then you have to deal with the fact there is stuff in there that you might not understand why He asks you to do it, you just have to have faith that God is good and that he loves you and gives us commandments for our own good. God doesn't send people to hell, we ALL deserve to go there anyway. If Heaven is where we are as close as possible to God, then in our imperfect state it would be impossble for us to be with him, but he wants us to anyway. So he sent his son, Jesus, as a sacrifice. He took the punishment for us, and all we have to do is accept that. As we draw closer to God, he will give us wisdom and help to conquer our fallen nature, but first we have to surrender our lives to him completely. THAT is the point of Christianity, not guilt or ruining all our fun or whatever.

 

From: The Bible Should Not Be Used to Condemn Homosexuality

By the Rev. Dr. Walter Wink

Approached from the point of view of love rather than that of law, the issue is at once transformed. Now the question is not "What is permitted?" but rather "What does it mean to love my homosexual neighbor?" Approached from the point of view of faith rather than works, the question ceases to be "What constitutes a breach of divine law in the sexual realm?" and becomes instead "What constitutes integrity before the God revealed in the cosmic lover, Jesus Christ?" Approached from the point of view of the Spirit rather than the letter, the question ceases to be "What does Scripture command?" and becomes "What is the Word that the Spirit speaks to the churches now, in the light of Scripture, tradition, theology, psychology, genetics, anthropology, and biology?"

In a little-remembered statement, Jesus said, "Why do you not judge for yourselves what is right?" (Luke 12:57). Such sovereign freedom strikes terror in the hearts of many Christians; they would rather be under law and be told what is right. Yet Paul himself echoes Jesus' sentiment immediately preceding one of his possible references to homosexuality: "Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, matters pertaining to this life!" (1 Cor. 6:3 RSV). The last thing Paul would want is for people to respond to his ethical advice as a new law engraved on tablets of stone. He is himself trying to "judge for himself what is right." If now new evidence is in on the phenomenon of homosexuality, are we not obligated--no, free--to re- evaluate the whole issue in the light of all the available data and decide, under God, for ourselves? Is this not the radical freedom for obedience in which the gospel establishes us?
__________________

"Why not judge for yourselves what is right?"

Thats my advice to you, do "what is right" for you.

 

I don't, as such. I am not a Christian, pagan/wicca comes closest but I believe there's some truth in almost any religion on Earth. Yes of course the bible claims God is the only one, many religions do... but that is *the* most obvious things people would make up to get followers... If you just said 'this is a good way to live but there are dozens of other ways, pick one' you tend to get a lot less followers (and a lot less power) than if you claim you got the only truth and the rest are all evil hoaxes.

 

If you talk to the animals they talk to you and you will know each other.

If you do not talk to them then you will not know them and what you don't know you will fear.

What one fear's one destroys.

"Chief Dan George"

I feel this is the major reason for the anti-gay verses in religious texts. If the reason was the fact that they could not have kids, it would mean that the elderly would not be allowed to marry either. I think it is just fear. Like the first time I had Chinese food, I only liked the sweet and sour pork, cuz it was so sweet. It took a while to like all the rest, which I now do. And I used to think being gay was wrong, a sin, etc. Something one chose and could change. For some, maybe it is, but, many cannot, and that is okay, its normal.
Like astralgoldfish notes:

I never wanted any part of gay, and in fact would still quite like to trade up for normality- that just isn't possible. If god made me. He programmed me with gayness. My free will lets me choose to act on it or not, but gayness is inate. You can scan brains for masculinity or feminity. Gay people are generally more opposite orientated in their very DNA. I can't get blamed for that surely!

No, surely not.

 

I'm not sure I understand what you're thinking here. The reason you need the kids is so you have someone to take care of you when you *are* elderly; it would've been extremely rare for elderly people to have remained single until then and to not have children yet. If they became widowed, it wouldn't hurt for them to get together because that was already taken care of. Perhaps it was even beneficial because if only one got disabled at least the other would still be able to provide before they both became dependant on their children.

There are other things that support the theory that a lot of it was aimed at having families, contributing to the population... what's the exact quote 'go forth and be fruitful' or something? The small towns and villages of the time *wanted* to grow, needed to... but nowadays we have overpopulation.

Also honor your father and mother... apart from that that is of course a nice thing to do, it used to be vital to them! Nowadays of course any parents will be sad if their children never call or drop by, but it won't kill them. Many have savings and/or insurance, there are homes for the elderly, etc, etc (at least in the Western world).

I already mentioned the thing against incest.

 

in the article posted above, Rev. Dr. Walter Wink rippes 1 cor. 6:3 out of context. Te context is:

"If any of you has a dispute with another, dare he take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the saints? Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life! Therefore, if you have disputes about such matters, appoint as judges even men of little account in the church! I say this to shame you. Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers? But instead, one brother goes to law against another–and this in front of unbelievers!

The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated? Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers.

Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God." (1 cor. 6:1-11)

So as you can see, this is about christians having a dispute amongst eachother and going to a secular judge to get it settled. This is a very bad witness and Paul says: get this settled within the church community.
After this, Paul focuses on sinners, who will not enter the kingdom of God. Homosexuals amongst them. After verse 11, he continues to talk about sexual immorality, and marriage.

 

How can we be sure that Paul wasn't just projecting his own homophobia?
I don't think we can.
And what about the gay bishop? Isn't he going to heaven?