The Christian God Doesn't Hate Gays

[Jimmy the Pro]

Recently many posts have slammed God or Christians or both because they "hate gays" or claim they want to send them "to hell." This is not true. And I'll explain why...

God loves all His creations no matter what sexual make-up they have. If He did not, why would He choose to create men and women with sexual preferences for their own gender? It does not make sense unless God is in fact sadistic and would like to watch His creations suffer. But if that is true, if God is evil and only creates gays to send them to hell, then why stop there? Why in turn must He reward those He creates heterosexual. Basically, why would God doom some of His children but glorify the rest? He doesn't. That's nonsense.

BUT JIMMY! The Bible says that God will send gays to hell! Oh look we've got you there. You better believe the Bible otherwise you don't really believe in God and you aren't really a Christian. So Jimmy, choose your poison, disown the Bible so we can win on every other religious issue you bring up, or, agree with the Bible so we can continue to bash you about hating gays and how inconsiderate you are. Trapped like a rat.

Consider this, The Bible was inspired by God, but written by humans. God as we believe, is infalible, but humans as we know are not. Humans do not know everything. We believe that God influenced these writers but did not write the Bible Himself.

Is it possible then, for humans to have put gays with the crowd of what they believed were criminals or sinners because they just didn't understand that there was a difference in genetic make-up? Absolutely. But shouldn't God correct them? Suppose this scenario. You know nothign of genes, of red blood cells, of dopamine receptors, or anything of that sort. If somehow you had an inclination that all these things were the actual cause of sexual preference, would you in the least bit be inclined to believe it? Of course not, it sounds like made up mumbo jumbo.

So we must realize that humans who wrote the Bible were infact fallible. I concede that. Just because they made the mistake, does that mean that God doesn't truly love gays? Absolutely not. There are two options, either humans did not make the mistake EVER about any even in the Bible and gays will go to hell, or they could be mistaken and a God of love could still exist and love gays just as anyone else. I prefer the latter.

As a Christian I concede that the writers of the Bible were mistaken in this case and I believe that like slaves, like all other oppressed people we think will "go to hell" are loved by God and will not in fact go to hell so long as they choose not to.


Then can non believers at least concede if these writers were mistaken that it IS possible for a good God to love all, including gays? Is it POSSIBLE.

As a Christian I will concede that the Bible is not perfect and it's application is even less so. Should we stone those who work on Saturday? I don't think so.

Then can non believers at least concede that some parts of the Bible are truly meant to help humanity, as fallible as they are?

I understand things won't work in these threads without compromise on certain issues. I'll concede if you are willing to as well.

[Rainbow]

God did Not created homosexualists.
Otherwise, there is nobody present (on the Solar System's 3rd planet Earth, at least).
We, Mankind, created homosexuality, instead and indeed.

[Voluntary]

Quote by: Jimmy the Pro . Basically, why would God doom some of His children but glorify the rest? He doesn't. That's nonsense.

Got proof? Your bible says differently:John 3:36 (King James Version)

"He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him."

Did you forget to read this part of the bible or do you just conveniently ignore this fact?

BUT JIMMY! The Bible says that God will send gays to hell!

I never read that god will send gays to hell, but that it is a sin for a man lay with a man like he does with a women.

According John 3:36 I should expect your god's wrath for not believing in jesus.

Consider this, The Bible was inspired by God, but written by humans.

I have considered this. I really don't like christians cherry-picking the bible since it is a practice in hypocrisy. How do you believe in absolute morality based off an infallible doctrine?

God as we believe, is infalible, but humans as we know are not.

Do you recognize your words? The belief in god rest off of a fallible book.

So we must realize that humans who wrote the Bible were infact fallible. I concede that

Perhaps they were wrong about God. After all these humans that wrote the bible were fallible. Ever consider this?

Then can non believers at least concede if these writers were mistaken that it IS possible for a good God to love all, including gays? Is it POSSIBLE.

Again, have you ever considered that they were wrong about god? It would be nice to have some evidence of an Abrahamic god besides a fallible book.

Then can non believers at least concede that some parts of the Bible are truly meant to help humanity, as fallible as they are?

I'll admit this. I think many of the fables and allegories have benign intentions. This still does not prove god or the necessity of religion.

[Halofan48]

God did Not created homosexualists. Otherwise, there is nobody present (on the Solar System's 3rd planet Earth, at least). We, Mankind, created homosexuality, instead and indeed.

Are you saying homosexuality is a choice? or something else? please explain.

[Rainbow]

Quote by: Halofan48 Are you saying homosexuality is a choice? or something else? please explain.

Except for fractional number with DNA related cases, it is a pathology.

[Tycoon]

Consider this, The Bible was inspired by God, but written by humans. God as we believe, is infalible, but humans as we know are not. Humans do not know everything. We believe that God influenced these writers but did not write the Bible Himself.

Jimmy, you cannot use this as an excuse to your protect your religion. The truth is everytime a contradiction or a flaw is found in the Bible, people such as yourself attribute it to mankind's mistakes or misinterpretations.

[loser]

The problem with people is that they think too highly of themselves. Why can't they really look at themselves with complete objectivity and see that they have virtually no worth in and among themselves.

Most of you believe in evolution. You are taught that the Earth is about 4.5 billion years old. How long will you live? If you were drawing a time line of the earth, how big would it have to be so that your blip of existence would even show? Is it fair to compare your life to a puff of smoke? What fraction of the total time of existence do you occupy.

Next, how big is the earth? How many square feet of livable area? How much area do you occupy? How high up into the air would one have to go before you were 'invisible'? What fraction of the earth's surface do you occupy?

How much of the universe does the earth occupy? What percentage of the whole universe is the earth's mass? With this in mind, how relative are you to the universe?

Obviously, if God were human, He would be nothing...just like us. If He created the universe and everything in it, then that is a different story. But even if He didn't create the universe and only created humanity, even if God is an alien race from a distant galaxy who only 'planted' life on the Earth, He's still a big notch above humans, isn't He?

The reason people have such a hard time understanding God is because they try to paint Him with human strokes. They try to judge God by human standards. So, therefore, when they read about how God destroys humanity, women and children included, they call Him a monster. ROFL. That's just too funny. LOL. I keep laughing. Humanity is nothing more than a pile of dust. Good grief! It's funny you don't go through years of mourning every time you squash a roach. Get real, people...you are nothing, virtually worthless in the big picture of the universe. If God has even a passing interest in you, you should be OVERWHELMED! Scripture puts it succinctly:

(GNB) Psa 8:3 When I look at the sky, which you have made, at the moon and the stars, which you set in their places---
Psa 8:4 what are human beings, that you think of them; mere mortals, that you care for them?


A house mouse lives one to two months. How important is that mouse's life to you? Yet, science says that our genetic code differs by only about 300 genes. IOW, you are a not-too-distant relative with that rodent.

God is spirit and is eternal. We share no genetic code with God because He is not flesh.

From these two observations, can you not see that it is infinitely more wrong for you to kill a rat than for God to kill a human?

Basically, why would God doom some of His children but glorify the rest?

Have you ever had a fruit tree in your yard? Did you notice how some fruit would be good to eat but some were not? Maybe they were rotten or maybe they had worms in them but, nevertheless, there were some which you discarded, threw on the ground for the birds and other animals.

It's like that with God. He's growing a garden and He is planning a harvest. Since He has planted much more than He needs, He can be very selective in His harvest...choosing only the cream of the crop.

The good news, however, is that God doesn't judge in the same way or for the same reasons as man. For example, in a man's harvest of apples he would judge the apples on their appearance. If they didn't LOOK good, he would reject them. Not so with God. Outward appearances are NOT the defining traits that God is interested in. Homosexuals (and adulterers, liars, murderers, and thieves) take heart...there's still hope for you (and even for proud, handsome, vain, perfect specimens as myself). Of course, there's some crucifying that has to be done first in order for us to have a chance.

God did Not created homosexualists.

This is true.

Except for fractional number with DNA related cases, it is a pathology.

True again except that even in those fractional DNA cases, it is still pathological.

The truth is everytime a contradiction or a flaw is found in the Bible, people such as yourself attribute it to mankind's mistakes or misinterpretations.

The truth is that every time it is a flaw in humanity's reasoning and perception. Humans can't even understand each other; how are they going to understand God?

[gela]

Except for fractional number with DNA related cases, it is a pathology.

lol! are you saying that homosexuality is a disease?

Please. If your going to use big sciency words, back them up with some big sciency facts.

[Piscean]

This is an awesome thread Jimmythepro is a christian who uses the mind God gave him to think with. And loser has some interesting things to say too. However loser thinks people aren't important and Gods growing a big harvest to take a few. That's where ya loose me man. I know the bible talks like that I've read it too but once again. The bible is written by the hands of men, and men paint their ways of thinking onto God, and like you said that's a big problem. Why doesn't it seem obvious that we are all little pieces of our source. I don't mean our bodies I mean our life force. The same life force in animals trees etc. It's all God and as such it will all be redeemed to God whatever crucifixion must come first. If you study the scriptures hard enough you'll realize that God is in control of everything and mans so called free will is an illusion. It's no wonder that even the writers of the bible didn't want to except the idea that we don't have free will, nobody wants to accept that, it's probably the hardest thing for any man to except. In our puny futile pride filled minds it's not acceptable. Also all the evil scare tactic teachings of christianity wouldn't hold up anymore if not for the idea of free will. It's your fault that you are how u are and u better change and do like we say or else. God lets us fool ourselves and each other with this because we are still just living out a predetermined plan much bigger than any of us could ever comprehend or figure out. God's sovereignty is absolutely real and there is no way that our free will can be true at the same time. If you ask a pastor about this you'll get mumbo jumbo and a magic spell, or an honest " I don't know how those two things can be true at the same time" You are thinking for yourself right now the thoughts that have been chosen and allowed for you to think. God gives the ears to hear and eyes to see to those God chooses etc. If someone changes in belief, it was Gods will. I'll probably get flamed for daring to say all this but maybe someone out there is ready to understand something that clears up an immeasurable amount of confusion. And all people being little fragments of God are forever immesurably important, as are all living things. Does that mean you shouldn't hunt an animal to feed your family? Absolutely not, if your hunt is successful, it's a gift of God, a piece of life to give you life. The native americans gave thanks for this reason. But huge truths like this are too big for the spiritual babies (majority of mankind) to accept so we go on fighting in ignorance and illusion. It's nothing to lose sleep over though because God is responsible for it all and all truths will be revealed and all suffering ended when we are collectively ready. Like Einstein said, we have to all be in. Only God can bring us all to the understanding of truth and until then we will always be engaged in debates, wars, injustices etc. We need all this pain for our character development or something;-)

[Jack]

Humans can't even understand each other; how are they going to understand God?

According to the Bible, the inability of humans to all speak the same language is god's responsibility. So blame him, not us, if you accept the authority of that book.
It's not a matter of understanding god. It's a matter of not having any reason to believe gods exist in the first place.

[Chris]

Quote by: Jimmy the Pro Consider this, The Bible was inspired by God, but written by humans. God as we believe, is infalible, but humans as we know are not. Humans do not know everything. We believe that God influenced these writers but did not write the Bible Himself.

Then why didn't god write it himself on some magic gold plates or some stones on a mountainside?

Why would god create beings that cannot understand him and force them to interpret his "word" whatever that is?

[HelioPrime]

Quote by: Chris Then why didn't god write it himself on some magic gold plates or some stones on a mountainside? Why would god create beings that cannot understand him and force them to interpret his "word" whatever that is?

Because that's not what happened. There are endless what if questions, but their not really debate worthy because in the end your not really looking for an answer or to debate a point, just to think up new why and what if questions.

As for the second part if humans were able to understand with clarity it would defeat the purpose of judgement and free will. What person would choose to be an atheist is they knew for certain God and heaven existed.

[Morality Games]

Then can non believers at least concede that some parts of the Bible are truly meant to help humanity, as fallible as they are?

The Bible obviously can't completely contradict what humans want, otherwise we would have ditched it alongside the road a long time ago, but that is a far cry from proving it is an ideal which trumps all others. There is no instance in history or science which induces us to think the Christian religion has something nice other ideologies couldn't provide, or something essential that we can't go without.

Among other things, it just doesn't feel right or seem consistant with the facts to think that, after a long and difficult IF, the big THEN moment of our existence is accepting a wandering carpenter / storyteller with supernatural powers saved the human race from a fiery grave. It is just sort of anti-climatic and unbelievable when you think about it.

[auggi1457]

I am a Christian. I do not hate gays at all. God does not hate gays. I belive that god made gay people and loves all people the same. People take what God or Jesus says and turns it into something that is not true. God said that there needs to be a women and a man to make childeren. Gay people can not have childeren. God also talks about how it is a sin. When God says that it is a sin people automatically think that that means gays are going to hell. Not necessarily. God also says that it is a sin to lie. Does that mean that all people who lie are going to hell?
NO
God does not hate gays and he even says it. He says that he loves everyone.

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: Jimmy the Pro Recently many posts have slammed God or Christians or both because they "hate gays" or claim they want to send them "to hell." This is not true. And I'll explain why... God loves all His creations no matter what sexual make-up they have. If He did not, why would He choose to create men and women with sexual preferences for their own gender?

That's precisely the same question atheists are asking. We conclude that this is yet another reason to believe the Bible was written by barbaric imperfect humans without divine inspiration.. and you.. you conclude that it's better to make shit up for God's sake. The Bible is clear.. homosexual acts are abominable. God's inspired word has been the death of many homosexuals in the Middle East and hate of homosexuals in the US and other places. You can't accept that your god could do this.. so you're going to make shit up to cover his ass.

Consider this, The Bible was inspired by God, but written by humans. God as we believe, is infalible, but humans as we know are not. Humans do not know everything.

Consider this. It's all the work of humans.. just like all the other many holy texts that claim they're extraordinary works of inspiration from god.

This explains the barbarism.. and.. isn't it more likely?

We believe that God influenced these writers but did not write the Bible Himself. Is it possible then, for humans to have put gays with the crowd of what they believed were criminals or sinners because they just didn't understand that there was a difference in genetic make-up?

So.. because you can't defend the hatefulness towards gays in the Bible.. that MUST be the work of humans. Any problem in the Bible? Humans fault. A good moral piece of advice? OMG IT COULD BE NO OTHER THAN GOD!!

Absolutely. But shouldn't God correct them? Suppose this scenario. You know nothign of genes, of red blood cells, of dopamine receptors, or anything of that sort. If somehow you had an inclination that all these things were the actual cause of sexual preference, would you in the least bit be inclined to believe it? Of course not, it sounds like made up mumbo jumbo.

God allowing people to hate gays is just as bad as him inspiring it.

I suppose the people of the time just couldn't understand why slavery was wrong.. so why should God bother explaining it to them? Oh please.. you're making your god look even worse.

[Rainbow]

Quote by: gela lol! are you saying that homosexuality is a disease? Please. If your going to use big sciency words, back them up with some big sciency facts.

#1
It is social issues - related, while a process of upbringing is one of the fundamental ones.
#2
Do you mean DNA-anomaly reports ?

[gela]

#1 It is social issues - related, while a process of upbringing is one of the fundamental ones.

well if its social issues related, then it isn't a pathology.
I don't say that shy kids have a disease. I don't say that insecure adults have a disease.

Pathology: 2. The anatomic or functional manifestations of a disease

#2 Do you mean DNA-anomaly reports ?

What I ment was using the word pathology correctly. There is no scientific evidence that says that homosexuality is a disease.
If you want to claim that it is a disease, then you need something to back it up.

If you go to the 'gay gene' thread on the science and technology board, you will even find that there is alot of evidence that links homosexuality to how many older brothers you have.

[Rainbow]

Quote by: gela well if its social issues related, then it isn't a pathology. I don't say that shy kids have a disease. I don't say that insecure adults have a disease. What I ment was using the word pathology correctly. There is no scientific evidence that says that homosexuality is a disease. If you want to claim that it is a disease, then you need something to back it up. If you go to the 'gay gene' thread on the science and technology board, you will even find that there is alot of evidence that links homosexuality to how many older brothers you have.

I am afraid you you associate social issues with terms related to society, community, groups, etc. only.
Do you consider a process of upbringing for Social and/or Sociology and/or Psychology related issue ?

What disease are you talking about ? How did you come up to such conclusion ? Did I mention and/or suggest any disease ?
Are you familiar with the meaning of word that stands for pathology ?

What gene ?
Try to notice please, that IF my ancestors had been homosexualists, I would not exist.
Older brothers ? Are you implying I have no idea on my family roots ?
There has been No presence of Any homosexualist within my family, for the past appx. 500 years (!)
What brothers are you talking about ? :-) Is that a sort of paraphrase ?

Are we talking about DNA related cases, or pathological issues ?

[Halofan48]

2. The anatomic or functional manifestations of a disease:

pathology

that is a definition of Pathology and likely where she got the disease statement from.

As for the gene comment, who knows. If it is, it's likely recessive or something. Or perhaps it's a mutation on a gene. Or maybe something hormonal. Do we know? Not really. We have theories though.

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: Rainbow Try to notice please, that IF my ancestors had been homosexualists, I would not exist.

Actually, Rainbow.. you can't say that.

Homosexuality doesn't prevent reproduction: Homosexuals reproduce and would therefore be able to pass on a genetic propensity for homosexuality, or "gay genes," to use the skeptic's term (GregBear, 1993). This is shown by sociological studies and surveys. A Kinsey Institute study supplies one source of hard data about the propensity of homosexuals to engage in heterosexual sex which could result in offspring: "Of 262 self-identified lesbian women, 75% had had sex with men since age 18 and 43% of those who had always identified themselves as lesbian had done so (Sanders, Reinisch, & McWhirter, 1990). It is not uncommon for gay men and lesbian women (often for religious or social reasons) to marry into a heterosexual relationship and sire children (Jones, 1978).

Perpetuity of deleterious genes: Being maladaptive or nonconducive to reproduction does not ensure that a genetic trait will disappear. Even fatal diseases caused by recessive alleles, such as sickle-cell anemia in its homozygous form, are not eliminated from the human gene pool. (And, remember, homosexuality is not fatal, and homosexuals often reproduce.) Deleterious heterozygous traits are maintained at low frequencies because if heterozygous, they are not expressed, and can be passed on perpetually, only causing problems when matched with another heterozygous genotype as a homozygous allele. Furthermore, natural levels of mutation offset the natural slow decrease in frequency through natural selection. Thus, if the frequency of such a disease is only one in ten thousand, to reduce the deleterious allele just tenfold would take 500 generations, or about twelve thousand years in a human population (GregBear, 1993; Fairbanks, 1993).

[source]

Quote by: Rainbow Except for fractional number with DNA related cases, it is a pathology.

You're mistaken.

Twin studies: In multiple similar studies pairs of twins have been compared for sexual preference. A strong positive correlation between relatedness and similarity of sexual preference has been identified. Identical twins raised apart, for instance, are more likely to both be homosexual as adults (if one is homosexual) than fraternal twins, and both are more likely to share sexual orientation than genetically unrelated siblings raised together. Some twin studies have shown concordance rates as high as 100% (Friedman, 1988, p. 27). Based only on the data from these studies genetics can account for 31 to 74 percent of sexual orientation (GregBear, 1993; UPI no author, 1993; CNN Health Works, 1993; Bower, 1992; Puterbaugh, 1990). Based on such evidence Richard C. Pillard of the Boston University School of Medicine declared said, "Male sexual orientation is substantially genetic" (Bower, 1992).

An unchosen preference: There is no evidence to suggest that the sexuality of the majority of people, homosexual or heterosexual, is a result of a conscious choice on their part. Despite the frequently heard popular assertations that homosexuality is a choice (De Witt, 1992), the overwhelming majority of homosexual males and females indicate they never chose to become homosexual, but that they are that way innately (SteveD41, 1993, "Evidence"; GregBear, 1993). Those who would dismiss this point make the untenable mistake of believing in synchronized mass dishonesty, rather than accepting the stated feelings of homosexuals as indicators of (at least partially) natural biological drives.

Statistical information gathered from interviews with large numbers of American homosexuals and heterosexuals reveals a quantitative presence of feelings of difference in pre-homosexual children. Children who mature into adult homosexuals are behaviorally different from their pre-heterosexual counterparts in many ways, exhibiting "gender nonconformance," a refusal to act out traditional gender roles, from the age of 2 or 3 on, as well as a number of other developmental differences (Bell, Weinberg, & Hammersmith, 1981). The innate sex drive of homosexuals is so powerful a determinant of their behavior that many choose to respond to it, even while facing intense social and cultural pressure not to. Said one homosexual male, "our need to love others of our gender is innate. There is no choice involved" (Anecdotal accounts include: Leavy, 1993; Alex, 1993; SteveD41, 1993, "God made ").

Physical differences: Recent physiological studies have demonstrated physically detectable differences between homosexuals and heterosexuals. Simon LeVay's hypothalamus study (1991) found that the hypothalamus, "a part of the brain that helps regulate sexual behavior, was smaller in homosexual men than in heterosexual men; it was equivalent to the dimensions seen in heterosexual women" (Angier, 1992).

A second anatomical difference was subsequently discovered by Dr. Laura S. Allen and Dr. Roger A. Gorski of the University of California at Los Angeles. Allen and Gorski found that another brain structure, the anterior commissure, a "cord of nerve fibers that allows two halves of the brain to communicate with one another, is larger in homosexual men than it is in either heterosexual men or in women." LeVay said of he Allen-Gorski studies: "'I think the work is very good, and I think it's correct It's such a clear result, and in a sense it's more important than my own finding" (1992).

New findings support "a neuroendocrine predisposition for homosexuality" (study by Dr. Gunther Dorner and associates, as reported by Ellis, 1992). Other studies indicate hormonal differences in homosexuals (West, 1977).

Even with the increased number of studies being conducted, the "question of the basic origin of fixed homosexuality remains controversial" (Ellis, 1992). The trend is towards identifying biological factors which may lead to a predisposition for homosexuality, while leaving the door open for environment and experience as determining factors in individual behavior.

[source]