Salient ...,
Salient
Thank you very much for the reply. On the one hand, it appears you've given the issue much consideration. To the other, I hope to present a couple of perspectives that may have not have come up.
I believe in one God, and that is the God in the Bible.
It is important to me to ask here
why you believe in God. You seem to explore that idea in a couple of aspects, but by and large what I'm after is how you came to accept that faith.
The Bible speaks of homosexuality in two primary bodies: Hebrew laws pertaining to a good stretch spent wandering the desert, and the Pauline evangelization of which many of his assertions are definitively contemporary opinions of Christ, and not factual. In the case of homosexuality, for instance, Paul is instructing Christians in a subject ignored by Jesus. There is much debate, I suppose, to be had regarding whether or not that lack of attention is deliberate, and how it relates to Jesus' perspective on Hebrew Law. What of those parts of the Law he didn't address? In the modern, political fight, then, we see a reliance among Christian homophobes on Hebrew Law and Pauline evangelism while those inclined to the liberty of all people would point out a lack of any specific prohibition from Jesus' mouth and extrapolate on compassion.
How one comes to faith is vital in determining the relationship between faith and the living experience. For instance, a lifetime Christian, taught in the cradle, may indeed overlook perspectives due to the inherent prejudices of the religious system. A recent born-again might tend toward self-centered issues, the idea of "What Jesus has done for me." To the former, I always hope to offer alternative perspectives. To the latter, I do generally accuse a sense of greed in which one's salvation is the central motivator of faith. There are, of course, myriad degrees of faith, but the generalizations should at least justify why I ask.
The Bible states that homosexuality is a sin. Do you know the story of Sodom and Gommorrah? It mentions in that story that homosexuality was a growing practise in Sodom and Gommorrah, God hated it, he was angered and eventually He destroyed the place.
What I find interesting in this aspect about the tale is that one can throw one's own daughters out to be gang-raped, and at least it isn't as bad as homosexuality. Sodom and Gommorrah is an interesting tale, indeed.
Of Hebrew Law, though, consider those laws written around the period in the desert: Homosexuality, tattoos, bowel movements, self-mutilation in mourning--do we see any common trends here? All of these things lead to danger for a limited group of people functioning in those circumstances. Reproduction is key, sanitation is vital. Prohibitions against homosexuality relate to the spread of disease, just as prohibitions against casual heterosexual intercourse are designed. (Note: one need not be a genetecist to document that incestuous offspring often have birth defects; since style wasn't as important in the sense of
How desperate do you look? it's fair to wonder if prohibitions against incest weren't Spencerist recognitions of the perpetuity of the human species.
Do you cut your temple locks?
BEcause I have felt his prsence in my life so evidently. In everything that I do, in everything that I am about to do, I feel that He is always there to guide me. I know He's there.
It seems to me that you believe He's there, not know He's there. Presently, I'm reading a faith statement. How do you know it is His presence? I asked my mother once if she was happy. She said yes. I knew this was BS, so I countered with the question, "Have you actually found happiness, or have you found something and called it happiness?" Of faith and knowledge, I ask the same:
Have you found knowledge, or have you found faith and called it knowledge?
Somewhere out there there's a greater being that has made all things possible.
Those "all things" also include homosexuality, whether in humans, canines, primates, or otherwise. It's part of nature, and is therefore natural. Masturbation isn't unnatural just because it doesn't procreate. In fact, there are parts of the world where procreation is a bad thing due to resources (e.g--Africa).
There is another level in life, than just the reality of the world. There is not just the physical but also the spiritual.
I agree. Where we probably differ is that in light of such a fact, I wonder why we would wish to limit our potential within that reality to the finite product of a single-volume anthology. For two-thousand years, people have reformulated Christian faith with no sterling result; the outcome is a world that is ready to pass Christian values by. It's not that the values are bad, but that they're baseless and unyielding. I understand that your faith compels you to this opinion, but I also see that faith and its result as divisive and detrimental. Christian harmony can be a presence in the world; it simply requires better tolerance. Understandably, this is God's command, according to the faith, but Western Christians don't seem that inclined to adhere to those points: God says
Thou shall not suffer a witch to live. Barbaric Christians in the past used this and other Biblical justifications for murder. Why not now? Just like the homosexual prohibitions, this is what God commands. Point being: we know this is a bad idea, to be killing people in a free society for religious disagreements. But that doesn't change the Bible. We see that people have adopted civil tolerance before; what, just because the law doesn't force one to respect someone, they might as well go forth condemning? I just don't understand it philosophically. It seems an arbitrary faith point designed to reinforce existing prejudices. And that, sir, is why I object.
thanx,
Tiassa