Where is the record of God creating Homosexuals in the Creation Account?

[KCKID]

Sexual attractions to other things and same-sex came as sin and error because of the fall and disobedience.

Hmmm . . .so Adam - and PARTICULARLY Eve - are responsible for the creation of homosexual desires, eh ...?

The mind boggles.

 

[stumpjumper]

So far we have had a lot of claims that God created homosexuals by implication that He must have done because God created all people. However that doesn’t even address the OP question where is the record in the creation account, on the contrary the scripture shows God didn’t create homosexuals. The Bible says God created man and woman, to be united, so that means He didn’t create homosexuals because homosexuals don’t want to be united man and woman. QED. To suggest God did by implication is a statement of disbelief in what the scripture says in the first place.

I suggest you check your Bible.

Colossians 1:16-17
For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
​

 

[Sitswithamouse]

God created Adam and Eve.
God created the tree of knowledge from there sin entered the world, therefore God created homosexuality because he created the tree of knowledge to cause sin to enter the world..

 

[Polycarp1]

Slightly off-topic (but relevant) derail...

In physics, heat has objective reality. It's the rate at which the molecules within a substance are vibrating, a measure of the inherent energy they possess.

"Cold" does not. Cold is definable only in terms of the relative absence of heat, something not true of heat in terms of cold.

Likewise, God [does "create evil" in one very metaphorical, nitpicky sense -- but it's the sense in which Isaiah meant it.

Good is objectively real -- it's what's in accord with God's will. Evil, like cold, does not have distinct objective reality -- it can only be defined in terms of the absence of good. One can identify extreme-case scenarios for almost anything that would normally be tagged as sin: killing in cold blood the man who's about to open fire on a kindergarten class with an automatic weapon, the woman who gave in to sex with her husband's abductor in order to help her husband escape and save his life; etc.

In order for "good" to be meaningful, there must be an alternative. If I say that all thing are "entiant", defining that word as the property which all things whatsoever, whether real or imaginary, have in common, I have done nothing useful, because there is no alternative to that term that might mean anything. Notrhing can be "non-entiant" -- by definition.

Likewise, in order for people to be able to choose the good, evil must exist to make thier choice meaningful. In this sense, and only in this sense, can one say that "God creates evil." He makes choices meaningful, by permitting them to have consequences. Evil results from bad choices -- not from His acts.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear Polycarp1,

The point at hand dividing the two schools of thought here is whether the sinful desires condemned in those passages include the humanly-unchangeable desires felt by people who enter into committed loving romantic-sexual same-sex relationships.

No that’s all assumption and not in the scripture so its false assumption as it contradicts what is in the scripture. Your reasoning is not based on false assumption at the expense of the scripture. Faithful union is mentioned by Jesus as God original creation purpose in creating man and woman.

Just as a man's love for his wife, and his desire for her within the bounds of marriage and her own dignity and integrity, are not condemned by the scriptures against fornication, adultery, incest, etc., etc., is it not possible

No not possible at all.

that the manifest evils God was condemning --patronizing of enslaved boy prostitutes,

assumption! Its doesn’t say that.

use of gay sex for new kicks by ennui-laden aristocrats,

assumption, it doesn’t say that

anal sex with the male priest of the local fertility goddess as part of pagan fertility rites,

assumption! It doesn’t say that

anal gang rape of strangers in town

assumption it doesn’t say that.

... that it was these manifest evils and not the private loving consensual conduct that aroused His ire?

these weren’t the eveils described these are the assumed evils with which you try and ignore the same-sex sex condemnations. Its merely massive disbelief.

Ignore the human "ick factor" and try to focus on God's justice, and have in yourself the mindset with which He judges.

This is the problem, you are advising people who do not think you are focused on God by demonstration of your disbelief in scripture, to focus on God. Your argument seems more focused on getting others to think the way you do than anything to do with God.

 

[stumpjumper]

Good point Polycarp and that's the point I've been trying to make. Plantinga would say that God has allowed a class of evils to exist for a greater good. In that sense, God has created the ability to sin and hence sin even though he does not will or author sin and evil.

The ability to sin, and hence sin itself, exists for a greater good. We would all do well to have that ability end in a false outcome, or an unchosen path, but it still exists nonetheless.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear KCKID,

Hmmm . . .so Adam - and PARTICULARLY Eve - are responsible for the creation of homosexual desires, eh ...?

The mind boggles.

Where does the scripture saya that? No, disobedience and the subsequent knowledge of evil are responsible.

 

[stumpjumper]

Did you bother to read Colossians yet Phinehas

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear Stumpjumper,

I suggest you check your Bible.

I have done that’s why I see God created man and woman to be united.
Colossians 1:16-17 “For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.” Yep all things, including men and women but He created woman for man to be united, not homosexuals which is the opposite of what He created. What is your point there is no mention or concept of homosexual or same-sex union in Colossians 1:16:17
I suggest you check your Bible Romans 1:26 “Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion”

 

[stumpjumper]

Dear Stumpjumper,
I have done that’s why I see God created man and woman to be united.
Colossians 1:16-17 “For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.” Yep all things, including men and women but He created woman for man to be united, not homosexuals which is the opposite of what He created. What is your point there is no mention or concept of homosexual or same-sex union in Colossians 1:16:17
I suggest you check your Bible Romans 1:26 “Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion”

So if the Bible is correct and God created "all things visible and invisible" then you have a problem with arguing that God did not create homosexuals.

Were they uncreated?
Is so, are all homosexuals "begotten and not made"? That seems a bit blasphemous to me...

Perhaps they were created by some other power, then. If so, then you are wandering right back into various shades of dualism and gnosticism.

I think the best route would be to listen, once again, to scripture and realize that God created homosexuals and everything else...

Colossians 1:16-17
For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

​

I don't think scripture could be any more clear. Now, if I were you, I would have to level a charge of disbelief in scripture like you just did to Polycarp but I'll be nice

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear Stumpjumper,

So if the Bible is correct and God created "all things visible and invisible" then you have a problem with arguing that God did not create homosexuals.

So if you are suggesting the Bible might not be correct why are you bothered?
God created man and woman, not homosexuals, He created man and woman to be in union so He obviously didn’t create homosexuals who are people who don’t want to be in man woman union. So I cant see how you can assume God might have created something opposite to what he created? And I might add the OP puts the onus on you to show where in the record God is supposed to have created homosexuals, the whole false basis of all the arguments.

Perhaps they were created by some other power, then. If so, then you are wandering right back into various shades of dualism and gnosticism.

I think the best route would be to listen, once again, to scripture and realize that God created homosexuals and everything else...

I think the best bet for you is to address my questions which will show you your questions are meaningless.

I don't think scripture could be any more clear .

Its very clear, no mention of homosexual and there wont be as God created man to be united with woman, the very opposite to the homosexual concept.

 

[Criada]

Dear Stumpjumper,

God created man and woman, not homosexuals, He created man and woman to be in union so He obviously didn’t create homosexuals who are people who don’t want to be in man woman union. So I cant see how you can assume God might have created something opposite to what he created? And I might add the OP puts the onus on you to show where in the record God is supposed to have created homosexuals, the whole false basis of all the arguments.


I think the best bet for you is to address my questions which will show you your questions are meaningless.

Its very clear, no mention of homosexual and there wont be as God created man to be united with woman, the very opposite to the homosexual concept.

I am homosexual.
I exist.
So if God didn't create me..... to whom else are you ascribing creative power?

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear Criada,

I am homosexual.
I exist.
So if God didn't create me..... to whom else are you ascribing creative power?

So you arent a man or a woman? God created men and woman according to His purposes to be united. Thats what you exist for according to the word of God in Genesis 2, Matt 19, Mark 10, Eph 5 that we are discussing. The Bible is full of the man.woman union, no mention of same-sex unions except condmenation.

 

[ChaliceThunder]

Being homosexual is not the same thing as living a life bound to homosexuality.

Indeed, the question you posed in the OP (AIUI) was not whether God creates people as homosexuals, but whether God creates homosexuals.

There is quite a difference between those two points of view. Whatever one believes about the first possibility, I'd say that the only possible opinion that's consistent with Scripture is that God creates all people, including homosexuals.

(And yes, I realise you've got me set on ignore, for whatever reasons I can't even begin to guess. But meh. Someone else do me a favour and quote this post so IAR can see it, plz.)

David.

At the request of David

 

[tulc]

No that’s all assumption and not in the scripture so its false assumption as it contradicts what is in the scripture. (emph. added)

"BANG!!"
Seriously, I need to find a sturdier irony meter!
Aren't YOU making two assumptions in that one statement alone?
1st that Scripture is always right, and 2nd believing your understanding of a Scripture is the only correct one?
tulc(people who assume shouldn't throw assumption stones)

 

[Crazy Liz]

Dear Crazy Liz,

Perhaps, then, you can explain your argument in view of our perspective.

If I correctly understand your argument, because Genesis does not mention sexual orientation, the statement, "God made me and I am gay" is false.

true, God didn’t make anyone gay. He did make people black and white

God made me and I am black. etc

true. You can see their skin is black or white. Sexual desires are not the same.

God made me and I have Down syndrome.

God made each person and obviously God didn’t make people with disease as Jesus went round healing sickness.

As you say, it is obvious to everyone that this is not a simple question, but part of an argument.

Its simple enough as long as one focuses on what the scripture says and not modern concepts of deviant sexual desires contrary to God’s creation purpose. In fact it couldn’t be simpler
Please keep in mind the OP question is "Where is the record of God creating Homosexuals in the Creation Account?" and not what others did God create which was the basis of your question.

Let's re-examine the question, then, according to your terms.

Where is the record of God creating black people and white people in the creation account?

You say God obviously created black and white, but if we were to reframe this question back into the exact form of the OP, how would you answer the question?

 

[Criada]

Dear Criada,
So you arent a man or a woman? God created men and woman according to His purposes to be united. Thats what you exist for according to the word of God in Genesis 2, Matt 19, Mark 10, Eph 5 that we are discussing. The Bible is full of the man.woman union, no mention of same-sex unions except condmenation.

Yup, I am a woman.
And married to a man

One's orientation and one's activity are two different thing... despite what some here seem to believe.

However, the OP asks who created homosexuals.... not whose idea were homosexual relationships.
God created gossips too... despite the fact that He condemns gossiping..

The sin and the sinner, you see, are not the same thing

 

[Crazy Liz]

Dear Criada,

I am homosexual.
I exist.
So if God didn't create me..... to whom else are you ascribing creative power?

So you arent a man or a woman? God created men and woman according to His purposes to be united. Thats what you exist for according to the word of God in Genesis 2, Matt 19, Mark 10, Eph 5 that we are discussing. The Bible is full of the man.woman union, no mention of same-sex unions except condmenation.

Who has argued that homosexuals are not men and women?

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear tulc,
Are you assuming that I cant understand English? I can. People can interpret scripture in different ways they can’t ‘interpret’ scripture in context the opposite of what it says, I call this disbelief.

 

[Polycarp1]

Dear Polycarp1,
No that’s all assumption and not in the scripture so its false assumption as it contradicts what is in the scripture. Your reasoning is not based on false assumption at the expense of the scripture. Faithful union is mentioned by Jesus as God original creation purpose in creating man and woman.

No not possible at all.
assumption! Its doesn’t say that. assumption, it doesn’t say that assumption! It doesn’t say that assumption it doesn’t say that.
these weren’t the eveils described these are the assumed evils with which you try and ignore the same-sex sex condemnations.

The point, dear Phinehas, is not whether any of the assumptions I made based on vocabulary, cultural context, allusions, etc., may be valid. The point is that you are doing precisely the same thing in investing the terms of Scripture with the meanings that you prefer. We're agreed that Paul says that arsenokaites (among others) shall not inherit the Kingdom; we disagree on what Paul meant by that word. And you are no more an authority on God's inward thoughts and judgment than I am.

Its merely massive disbelief.
This is the problem, you are advising people who do not think you are focused on God by demonstration of your disbelief in scripture, to focus on God. Your argument seems more focused on getting others to think the way you do than anything to do with God.

Look. You may disagree with me all you want. But when you post here in flat, unnuanced terms that I am guilty of "massive disbelieve" and "disbelief in Scripture," you are crossing not only the bounds of good taste and honest debate but the rules of this board and the commandments of God.

I believe in God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit with every fiber of my being -- or at least strive to do so. I seek to follow His will as summarized in the teachings of Christ according to the guidance of my clergy, my own studies, the advice of those I respect in the faith, and the leading of prayer. I love and honor the Holy Scriptures as the precious and irreplaceable documentation of God's will and work through the ages and most particularly in the life and passion of our Lord and Savior. What I do not believe in is infallibility, whether it be papal infallibility, Scriptural inerrancy, or the self-arrogated certitude smugly voiced in the opinions posted on a message board by people calling themselves Phinehas2, IAmRedeemed, etc.

I disagree with you. Not with God. There is a difference. Just in case no one had yet made you aware of the fact.