Christianity and Homosexuality

[Dempublicents1]

I never said it was unreasonable for someone to believe that God operates according to natural laws - even in this universe. God may have decided to only work within the laws of this universe.

But that wouldn't change the fact that a creator God would be outside of nature, as defined by this universe.

I don't agree. I think we're coming at this from different starting points so it's natural (pardon the pun) to have differing assumptions, so let's agree to disagree.

You don't agree that, in order to create something, you have to have existence outside of it?

In other words, you believe the watchmaker can create the watch when the watchmaker's existence is dependent on the existence of the watch?

[Gift-of-god]

Maybe. I think that depends largely on how you view God's level of participation in the day to day running of the Universe. Does God keep His hands dirty, tweaking and tinkering on a daily basis, or is he like the old Watchmaker (not to be confused with the watchmaker analogy I used earlier) where He created the Universe, wound it up, and just lets it do its thing?

If God exercises control over every little event then yes, the existence of any homosexuality must be directly attributable to Him by default. If, on the other hand, God is more of an observer, then who can say?

I think the reality is probably somewhere in between. If God micromanages then free will means nothing. If God is a "hands off" kind of guy then prayer is a waste of time.

A lot of Christians probably see it that way as well, with the added variable of activity by the Devil, who is ultimately held responsible for any evil or "bad" stuff that happens. The world is regarded as corrupt and difficult because of his influence and so anything bad that happens can be thus explained. "If homosexuality is bad, then it's the Devil's fault it exists."

That's how I understand it to be viewed from the majority of Christians.

You seem to be confusing two different things: 1) the god that is part of nature that we are discussing, and 2) what most Xians believe. To be clear: most Xians do not believe that God (or the Holy Spirit or Jesus in anything but the most limited way) is part of nature.

Most Xians believe in an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent Trinity that somehow punishes homosexuals for their sins. This is not a logical stance as an omnipotent god would be able to design a universe where no one chooses to sin, an omniscient one would lead to theological fatalism and make the concept of sin meaningless, and an omnibenevolent god would not punish people for such a trivial thing.

The god as nature model is inimical to Christian thought for one reason: if I am one with god, and I go out and have homosexual sex, then that logically means that god, on some level, is out having homosexual sex.

[Ascon]

You don't agree that, in order to create something, you have to have existence outside of it?

In other words, you believe the watchmaker can create the watch when the watchmaker's existence is dependent on the existence of the watch?

Maybe. What if God and the Universe are tightly bound, such that though He may have at one time existed outside it, that is no longer possible, that by creating the Universe He becomes an integral part of it. A watchmaker can put down a watch and walk away. A man can build a house, live in it, then leave it. What if God is a part of the Universe, such that if He leaves it, it ceases to exist?

That being the case, then what is natural for Him IS natural for the Universe. In fact, what is natural for the Universe would depend entirely on what is natural for God.

[Ascon]

You seem to be confusing two different things: 1) the god that is part of nature that we are discussing, and 2) what most Xians believe. To be clear: most Xians do not believe that God (or the Holy Spirit or Jesus in anything but the most limited way) is part of nature.[/note]

I'm not sure I'd be willing to concede that second assertion, despite what the "official" stance may be. People who use the "homosexuality is wrong because it isn't part of nature" must necessarily believe that God is tied to nature otherwise the naturalness of homosexuality one way or the other would be irrelevant.

Now, one could argue that God is supernatural as opposed to unnatural which would resolve that, and I'd concede that the majority of Christians see it in that way, but I still maintain that if the "naturalness" (is that even a word?) of homosexuality is an issue at all, then nature must be associated closely with God.

Most Xians believe in an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent Trinity that somehow punishes homosexuals for their sins. This is not a logical stance as an omnipotent god would be able to design a universe where no one chooses to sin,

Which would relegate all of humanity to the status of marionettes

an omniscient one would lead to theological fatalism and make the concept of sin meaningless,

I'd disagree with that, in that freewill can exist even if God knows what choices we'll make.

and an omnibenevolent god would not punish people for such a trivial thing.

Assuming it's trivial, which it apparently is not, from a Christian point of view.

The god as nature model is inimical to Christian thought for one reason: if I am one with god, and I go out and have homosexual sex, then that logically means that god, on some level, is out having homosexual sex.

Which gets back to the question posed before: Is it natural for human beings to do so?

[Gift-of-god]

I'm not sure I'd be willing to concede that second assertion, despite what the "official" stance may be. People who use the "homosexuality is wrong because it isn't part of nature" must necessarily believe that God is tied to nature otherwise the naturalness of homosexuality one way or the other would be irrelevant.

Now, one could argue that God is supernatural as opposed to unnatural which would resolve that, and I'd concede that the majority of Christians see it in that way, but I still maintain that if the "naturalness" (is that even a word?) of homosexuality is an issue at all, then nature must be associated closely with God.

They don't nead to necessarily believe anything. If their beliefs were logically consistent, then they would necessarily believe some such thing. But we can safely assume that people who make that particular argument do not necessarily worry about logical consistency in their arguments.

Which would relegate all of humanity to the status of marionettes

Exactly, there is a logical contradiction in the classical Xian model between God's omnipotence and humanity's free will.

I'd disagree with that, in that freewill can exist even if God knows what choices we'll make.

Let us suppose that being omniscient involves being infallible, and believing that p if and only if it is true that p.

Let us also suppose that God existed in 1900, and that omniscience is part of his essence.

Now, suppose that Jones mowed his lawn on 1/1/2000.

Then God believed in 1900 that Jones would mow his lawn on 1/1/2000.

Did Jones have the power to refrain from mowing his lawn?

No. Because that would mean either (1) that he had the power to do something which would have brought it about that God had a false belief in 1900, or (2) that he had the power to do something which would have brought it about that God did not believe in 1900 that Jones would mow his lawn on 1/1/2000, or (3) that he had the power to do something which would have brought it about that God did not exist in 1900. And each of these alternatives is impossible.

Linky.

Assuming it's trivial, which it apparently is not, from a Christian point of view.

The traditional Christian view seems to suggest that this transcendent wonderful being who created the entire universe and had the vision to imagine the complexity of the entire evolution of the cosmos also has an inordinate interest in the sexuality of one species of technologically savvy primates on one single planet. The same view also ignores that this being's disproportionate interest also just happens to coincide with the sexual mores of a Bronze Age nomadic society.

Which gets back to the question posed before: Is it natural for human beings to do so?

No. It does not get back to that question. The facts are simple: many animals engage in homosexuality, these animals are a part of nature, therefore a part of nature engages in homosexuality. If god is all of nature (again, this is not the traditional Xian view), then a part of god engages in homosexuality.

[The Zodi Identity]

Homosexuality between men at least has zero to do with love, it is pure lust. Confusing it with love is like when naïve teenage girls think that because a man wants to screw them, he must love them. Love and lust are two separate things, even when eros is involved.

...speaking from personal experience or do you possess telepathy?

[KiloMikeAlpha]

I never said it was unreasonable for someone to believe that God operates according to natural laws - even in this universe. God may have decided to only work within the laws of this universe.

But that wouldn't change the fact that a creator God would be outside of nature, as defined by this universe.

I don't agree. I think we're coming at this from different starting points so it's natural (pardon the pun) to have differing assumptions, so let's agree to disagree.

You don't agree that, in order to create something, you have to have existence outside of it?

In other words, you believe the watchmaker can create the watch when the watchmaker's existence is dependent on the existence of the watch?

I explain it this way to the youth that I teach.

God is the architect. He builds computer games, and computers.
Jesus Christ is the one playing the games on the computers.

Mankind are SIMS in the game SimCITY. All we know how to do is what we were programmed by God to do. If we were never programmed to know anything about our creator, we can never know. We go about our merry lives, while Christ puts obstacles in our way, or removes them, both for our benefit.

This analogy is very simplistic and may have tons of holes, but it speaks to the relationship between the three. Jesus Christ cannot make the game do anything it was not programmed to do. Neither can the SIMs do anything they were not programmed to do. The SIMs however, appear to have some intelligence to go about thier daily activities.

[Conserative Morality]

I explain it this way to the youth that I teach.

God is the architect. He builds computer games, and computers.
Jesus Christ is the one playing the games on the computers.

Mankind are SIMS in the game SimCITY. All we know how to do is what we were programmed by God to do. If we were never programmed to know anything about our creator, we can never know. We go about our merry lives, while Christ puts obstacles in our way, or removes them, both for our benefit.

This analogy is very simplistic and may have tons of holes, but it speaks to the relationship between the three. Jesus Christ cannot make the game do anything it was not programmed to do. Neither can the SIMs do anything they were not programmed to do. The SIMs however, appear to have some intelligence to go about thier daily activities.

So, Jesus is the bored gamer creating tornadoes just to fuck with our lives? Good to know.

[The Alma Mater]

Neither can the SIMs do anything they were not programmed to do.

I really, really, really hope that this part of your analogy is complete nonsense. Otherwise suicide is the only reasonable thing to do to end such a pointless and pathetic existence.

[Gift-of-god]

Neither can the SIMs do anything they were not programmed to do.

If humans are the SIMs, and the Sims can only do that which they were programmed to do, then humans can only do so as well. If humans are engaging in homosexuality, it logicaly follows that they were programmed to do so. By God, apparently.

[KiloMikeAlpha]

Neither can the SIMs do anything they were not programmed to do.

I really, really, really hope that this part of your analogy is complete nonsense. Otherwise suicide is the only reasonable thing to do to end such a pointless and pathetic existence.

What I mean is that we cant fly or turn into rocks, because we are not programmed that way.

[Flameswroth]

So, Jesus is the bored gamer creating tornadoes just to fuck with our lives? Good to know.

I know I would be if I was Jesus. It would pretty much be a blast.

Neither can the SIMs do anything they were not programmed to do.

I really, really, really hope that this part of your analogy is complete nonsense. Otherwise suicide is the only reasonable thing to do to end such a pointless and pathetic existence.

I dunno about that. I mean, I don't particularly agree with the notion either, but if it is true then the 'preprogrammed' range of actions we have is really quite extensive, to the point that we really do not notice any sort of limitation. I don't know that it would warrant suicide to believe conceptually that our range of activities, choices etc is set at some extremely high number of possibilities, but set nonetheless, you know?

[KiloMikeAlpha]

Neither can the SIMs do anything they were not programmed to do.

If humans are the SIMs, and the Sims can only do that which they were programmed to do, then humans can only do so as well. If humans are engaging in homosexuality, it logicaly follows that they were programmed to do so. By God, apparently.

They are certainly ABLE physically to have homosexual sex.

[Kobrania]

So, Jesus is the bored gamer creating tornadoes just to fuck with our lives? Good to know.

I know I would be if I was Jesus. It would pretty much be a blast.

Neither can the SIMs do anything they were not programmed to do.

I really, really, really hope that this part of your analogy is complete nonsense. Otherwise suicide is the only reasonable thing to do to end such a pointless and pathetic existence.

I dunno about that. I mean, I don't particularly agree with the notion either, but if it is true then the 'preprogrammed' range of actions we have is really quite extensive, to the point that we really do not notice any sort of limitation. I don't know that it would warrant suicide to believe conceptually that our range of activities, choices etc is set at some extremely high number of possibilities, but set nonetheless, you know?

What about freedom of choice?

[Gift-of-god]

They are certainly ABLE physically to have homosexual sex.

Yeah, I know. God programmed them to.

[KiloMikeAlpha]

I explain it this way to the youth that I teach.

God is the architect. He builds computer games, and computers.
Jesus Christ is the one playing the games on the computers.

Mankind are SIMS in the game SimCITY. All we know how to do is what we were programmed by God to do. If we were never programmed to know anything about our creator, we can never know. We go about our merry lives, while Christ puts obstacles in our way, or removes them, both for our benefit.

This analogy is very simplistic and may have tons of holes, but it speaks to the relationship between the three. Jesus Christ cannot make the game do anything it was not programmed to do. Neither can the SIMs do anything they were not programmed to do. The SIMs however, appear to have some intelligence to go about thier daily activities.

So, Jesus is the bored gamer creating tornadoes just to fuck with our lives? Good to know.

Yeah. I keep getting those responses from my teenagers. The point is not to mess with us, the point is to test us. You see, it is very EASY to be righteous in the good times. Lets see how we do when times are tough. Some people curse God, some embrace Him. That is the point of these tests.

[Kobrania]

I explain it this way to the youth that I teach.

God is the architect. He builds computer games, and computers.
Jesus Christ is the one playing the games on the computers.

Mankind are SIMS in the game SimCITY. All we know how to do is what we were programmed by God to do. If we were never programmed to know anything about our creator, we can never know. We go about our merry lives, while Christ puts obstacles in our way, or removes them, both for our benefit.

This analogy is very simplistic and may have tons of holes, but it speaks to the relationship between the three. Jesus Christ cannot make the game do anything it was not programmed to do. Neither can the SIMs do anything they were not programmed to do. The SIMs however, appear to have some intelligence to go about thier daily activities.

So, Jesus is the bored gamer creating tornadoes just to fuck with our lives? Good to know.

Yeah. I keep getting those responses from my teenagers. The point is not to mess with us, the point is to test us. You see, it is very EASY to be righteous in the good times. Lets see how we do when times are tough. Some people curse God, some embrace Him. That is the point of these tests.

Others flash him around like pornography.

[Flameswroth]

What about freedom of choice?

That's what I'm getting at. If that scenario is true, it would seem to indicate that only a certain number of actions are possible/viable for us, which would (on the surface) seem to contradict the notion of free will. However, as the list of actions/choices we are programmed to be capable of making increases, the likelihood of encountering an agency-hindering scenario decreases.

I would wager that the number of programmed abilities in humans, under those conditions, is such a large number that it could effectively be treated as infinite from our point of view. Thus, free agency is not infringed upon. But then in that case, the notion that we are 'programmed' ahead of time is irrelevant, since it has no impact on our ability to function...

lol idk, I'm just a guy on the Internets.

[Conserative Morality]

Yeah. I keep getting those responses from my teenagers. The point is not to mess with us, the point is to test us. You see, it is very EASY to be righteous in the good times. Lets see how we do when times are tough. Some people curse God, some embrace Him. That is the point of these tests.

"I'm not going to show you who I am, but I'm going to mess with your lives. Obviously, giving you more pain and suffering will make you love me more. And if you curse me afterwords, a being that has constantly tormented you for no good reason, I'll make your life even worse."

God is such a brat.

[The Zodi Identity]

The name of this thread is Chritianity and Homosexuality.

OK.

Christianity is the religion based on the reported teachings of Jesus of Nazareth.

Nowhere in Jesus of Nazareth's three years of preaching, argument and parable telling did he comment on Homosexuality.

He DID find time to comment quite forcefully about 'bringing despair to children' - popularly interpreted as child rape.
He was quite the hanging judge - millstone + river = Drowning.

Now, if Jesus of Nazareth - the Christian's messiah - takes the trouble to short-circuit his own seven times seventy seven philosophy of forgiveness against those that act (as defined above) naturally (but against moral normality) when it comes to child rape, it is highly unlikely that the founder of Christianity held the same attitude towards homosexual people. he would have spoken out.

It is Paul the Roman Citizen that speaks out against the act of buggery (used as part of religious or personal intimidation). The sin of rape is a terrible thing and I think you will find that a majority of homosexual men and women will agree on this point.

Hint - Jesus hung out with Prostitutes and money lenders - yes, he was preaching for them to repent their sins - but he was concentrating on the victims of society in his work and not the fashionable élites and the powerful. This implies a bias on his part towards those that are constantly condemned by the 'holier than thou' religious leaders.

Either adhere to the concepts derived by Jesus of Nazareth as the most important teachings, trumping St. paul and teh Old Testament or call the religion Paulinism, or even Neo-Judaism.

End of rant.

[KiloMikeAlpha]

They are certainly ABLE physically to have homosexual sex.

Yeah, I know. God programmed them to.

He programmed the ability to. IMHO, homosexuality is mostly environmentally related.

Now, it is possible for some sort of genetic mutation to occur that causes this, I will grant you that. I cannot discount this any more than I can discount hermaphodites, albinos, primordeal dwarfism etc. I am not sure that God MAKES this happen as He ALLOWS it to happen as part of our tests. Now, that said, if it is a genetic thing that cant be helped, would gays be held accountable? Hard to say. I am inclinded to believe that most gays are influenced environmentally, not genetically.

So maybe the real question is: What's in the air that is causing men to become gay?

Thier legs

Just a joke people, Lighten up.

[Dempublicents1]

You don't agree that, in order to create something, you have to have existence outside of it?

In other words, you believe the watchmaker can create the watch when the watchmaker's existence is dependent on the existence of the watch?

Maybe. What if God and the Universe are tightly bound, such that though He may have at one time existed outside it, that is no longer possible, that by creating the Universe He becomes an integral part of it.

....which wouldn't change the fact that he existed outside of it.

A watchmaker can put down a watch and walk away. A man can build a house, live in it, then leave it. What if God is a part of the Universe, such that if He leaves it, it ceases to exist?

That still wouldn't make God "part of" the Universe. It would just mean that God's presence was necessary for the existence of the Universe. If God was part of the Universe, the reverse would be true - that the Universe seeking to exist would mean that God would cease to exist.

[Kobrania]

They are certainly ABLE physically to have homosexual sex.

Yeah, I know. God programmed them to.

He programmed the ability to. IMHO, homosexuality is mostly environmentally related.

Now, it is possible for some sort of genetic mutation to occur that causes this, I will grant you that. I cannot discount this any more than I can discount hermaphodites, albinos, primordeal dwarfism etc. I am not sure that God MAKES this happen as He ALLOWS it to happen as part of our tests. Now, that said, if it is a genetic thing that cant be helped, would gays be held accountable? Hard to say. I am inclinded to believe that most gays are influenced environmentally, not genetically.

So maybe the real question is: What's in the air that is causing men to become gay?

Thier legs

Just a joke people, Lighten up.

All behaviors have a genetically based dude, else they wouldn't be expressed.

[The Araucania]

KiloMikeAlpha you are an american militian?
........................................................................................................................

[Gift-of-god]

He programmed the ability to. IMHO, homosexuality is mostly environmentally related. ...

If that were the case, then you could say that God programmed them to be susceptible to environmental influences, or that your analogy doesn't really work.

Your pick.