Lets talk about homosexuality. + my experience being a lesbian

[Riven]

This is all resting on the false idea that homosexuality is biological. It isn't. Not only does God's word deny that it is, male biology itself indicates that homosexuality is not "in the genes." And research into homosexuality is also far from conclusive about homosexuality being congenital.

First you say it's not biological. Then you say the research into it isn't conclusive. We don't know for sure if it's biological, but the evidence points in that direction. Most people in the world are heterosexual. They are grossed out by the idea of doing anything sexual with the same sex.

Likewise, homosexuals are grossed out by the thought of doing anything with the opposite sex. Based on this knowledge, we can at least make an educated guess and say that it's probably biological.

But even if it was, homosexuality is a behavior, not a physical trait, and as such can be restrained and ordered like we do with our eating behavior, or social behavior, or behavior toward addictive substances or practices, and so on.

Of course. The question is, should gay people abstain from same sex relations just because it says so in the bible? I mean, celibacy for life doesn't sound healthy.

If the research eventually proves that it's biological, will Christians let go of their current position? I think not. Because they certainly haven't done so on issues like the age of the earth and evolution, just to name a few. I question whether evidence even matters to the average Christian. What purpose does research even serve if you've already reached a conclusion on an issue?

 

[Soldiers]

I mean, celibacy for life doesn't sound healthy.

You're opinion vs Scripture: Matthew 19:11-12 "11 Jesus replied, “Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. 12 For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others—and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”

If the research eventually proves that it's biological, will Christians let go of their current position?

Acts 5:29 "Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men."

As a Christian Riven, I don't know how you can justify those carnal arguments with Scripture, knowing Christ, as the Creator of all, has Ultimate Authority & Final say so.

His infinite knowledge surpasses our finite feelings.

The problem is humans think they know everything, it's like a 13-year-old trying to debate with his mother about who's the right girl for him, when objectively, everyone can see his mother is coming from experience & wisdom, and deep care & affection for her son. But the son is coming from a position of testosterone-overload and puberty hormones rushing through.

He cares only about the physical features, his mother cares about what's in the young lady's heart, (kinda reminds me of this verse: 1 Samuel 16:7 "But the Lord said to Samuel, “Do not look at his appearance or at the height of his stature, because I have rejected him. For the Lord sees not as man sees; for man looks at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart.”)

And I can speak from that position because I was that 13 year old. And now I thank God for what my parents taught me about dating, as if i had my way, I would've been mad at them and expecting them to help me with the unwanted children and the baby-momma-drama. When I'm the one who was blinded by physical traits (the devil knows what you like, he can most definitely cook up what you like, but as a counterfeit the essence of the inside of it will be raw, cold, uncooked, and poisonous. It looks good, but it's not.)

Proverbs 14:12 "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death."

The homosexual, heterosexual, whatever sexual sin may seem so darn right, but God knows it leads to death.

 

[Soldiers]

evidence even matters to the average Christian.

Man's limited opinion fails in contrast with God's Divine knowledge.

And on your evolution theory, how did the universe start? Any reasonable person knows that everything can't come from nothing, that's more "magical" than everything came from Infinity.

I rather believe Infinity created everything than nothing came with nothing for no reason and created everything.

Here's a good way to view this:

 

[Riven]

Man's limited opinion fails in contrast with God's Divine knowledge.

Perhaps. But if we take this line to its logical conclusion, that would be the end of science.

And on your evolution theory, how did the universe start? Any reasonable person knows that everything can't come from nothing, that's more "magical" than everything came from Infinity.

Evolution isn't about explaining where the universe came from. It's about explaining how life evolved over time.

 

[evenifigoalone]

Of course. The question is, should gay people abstain from same sex relations just because it says so in the bible? I mean, celibacy for life doesn't sound healthy.

That is what "side B" gays believe.

I agree that it's probably not the healthiest thing for people who have a normal sex drive. The Bible even says it's better to marry than to burn with passion.

 

[Soldiers]

Perhaps. But if we take this line to its logical conclusion, that would be the end of science.

Let me break down your sentence:
Perhaps.

But if we take this line to its logical conclusion. | Logic meaning what? Man's logical conclusion, the same finite imperfect and twisted personality of a conclusion?

That would be the end of science (which means knowledge). | This doesn't work because God is Omni-science, so by definition if we trust in God's Divine Wisdom rather than our personal opinions (which all wisdom of man amounts to), we'd move from finite knowledge to infinite knowledge. If anything, this will be the beginning of true science. The Bible declares this in Proverbs 9:10:

"The reverent and worshipful fear of the Lord is the beginning of Wisdom, and the knowledge of the Holy One is insight and understanding." (The word wisdom is translated from the original Hebrew word ḥāḵmâ, meaning insight, shrewdness, prudence, or skill in war. The word understanding is translated from the original Hebrew word bînâ, meaning the personification of knowledge)
Even if it did work, it would be the end of earthly, flawed, and heavily mistaken humanly, finite, carnal/fleshly driven human knowledge, and the beginning of adherence to objective, All-Knowing, and at the end of the day, All-Caring Divine Knowledge. Which is better don't you think?
A Scripture to note: James 3:13-17 "
13 Who is wise and understanding among you? Let them show it by their good life, by deeds done in the humility that comes from wisdom.
14 But if you harbor bitter envy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not boast about it or deny the truth.
15 Such “wisdom” does not come down from heaven but is earthly, unspiritual, demonic.
16 For where you have envy and selfish ambition, there you find disorder and every evil practice.
17 But the wisdom that comes from heaven is first of all pure; then peace-loving, considerate, submissive, full of mercy and good fruit, impartial and sincere."

Evolution isn't about explaining where the universe came from. It's about explaining how life evolved over time.

Which cannot be an argument to deny God's existence, if anything it shows how God did it. Correct?

 

[Soldiers]

I agree that it's probably not the healthiest thing for people who have a normal sex drive.

The problem with this is that flawed, carnal-driven, and hedonistic humans are defining what "healthy" looks like. Having sex with whoever you want to because you refuse to have some decency & self-control is not of God. No Scripture can confirm that theory, it's manmade and human wisdom, which cannot be trusted (James 3:15).

The Bible even says it's better to marry than to burn with passion.

You're right, but then begs the question: what is marriage, and who is marriage between?

The Bible defines this in Genesis 2, which Jesus backs up in Matthew 19, as between a man and a woman. Not a man & a man, not a woman & a woman. There is no Scripture whatsoever in existence that can affirm the worldly and carnal interpretation of marriage. And as I put in my "Understanding Blasphemy" thread, no man has the right to introduce a foreign concept to defy what's been Divinely Defined. To do so is to assume the only position which has the authority to first introduce marriage, to define marriage, and continually ordain marriage until the end of time: God.

Redefining marriage is as blasphemous as trying to forgive sins, both are assuming the office of God, who has exclusive rights over both, and using Scripture to justify a worldly concept (using the Godly to justify the not-Godly) is not seemly.

(Note: Please don't take this harsh or combatitive in any way as that's not my aim)

 

[evenifigoalone]

You know, meeting a person from that side of the spectrum who is not hostile, and is willing to even have their position challenged is a remarkable feat you have, you're the only person I met who's done that. Respond if you wish to don't if you don't.

I used to be on the more traditional side until very recently, so I understand that even some queer people fall into the traditional sexual ethic.

There is a lot of hurt in relation to religion and even actual religious trauma in the LGBTQ community, so people who are coming from that place do not always respond in the most courteous ways. Some hate Christianity or all religion altogether as a result, some maintain their faith but cannot understand those who cling to the traditional sexual ethic. I experienced this back when I was side B, I was often accused of having "internalized homophobia" when I in fact just wanted to adhere to my faith as well as I could.

So I understand both sides I feel.

Actually, I even made a little comic about my experience as a "side B" queer, I will include it on this post.

 

[evenifigoalone]

The problem with this is that flawed, carnal-driven, and hedonistic humans are defining what "healthy" looks like. Having sex with whoever you want to because you refuse to have some decency & self-control is not of God. No Scripture can confirm that theory, it's manmade and human wisdom, which cannot be trusted (James 3:15).

You're right, but then begs the question: what is marriage, and who is marriage between?

The Bible defines this in Genesis 2, which Jesus backs up in Matthew 19, as between a man and a woman. Not a man & a man, not a woman & a woman. There is no Scripture whatsoever in existence that can affirm the worldly and carnal interpretation of marriage. And as I put in my "Understanding Blasphemy" thread, no man has the right to introduce a foreign concept to defy what's been Divinely Defined. To do so is to assume the only position which has the authority to first introduce marriage, to define marriage, and continually ordain marriage until the end of time: God.

Redefining marriage is as blasphemous as trying to forgive sins, both are assuming the office of God, who has exclusive rights over both, and using Scripture to justify a worldly concept (using the Godly to justify the not-Godly) is not seemly.

(Note: Please don't take this harsh or combatitive in any way as that's not my aim)

I would generally agree that sex outside of marriage or at the very very least a committed relationship leading to marriage is unwise. There are many reasons for that I think.

So far as re: Gen. 2, I think the general affirming theological response is that back in bible days, they did not have a concept of sexual orientation like we do today and that while the Bible is indeed authoritative, it was still written from the limited perspective of the men who penned it down. That doesn't mean I believe the Bible contains errors. Just that while the writers were inspired by God, their perspective is also going to reflect cultural norms of the time.
Even in countries that openly practiced homosexuality, their understanding of it was quite different than the modern understanding. I would almost say that the idea of monogamous homosexuals in committed relationships and even marriage seems like it is, possibly, a very recent development.

 

[evenifigoalone]

If the research eventually proves that it's biological, will Christians let go of their current position? I think not. Because they certainly haven't done so on issues like the age of the earth and evolution, just to name a few. I question whether evidence even matters to the average Christian. What purpose does research even serve if you've already reached a conclusion on an issue?

I believe it is biological, cuz what else would it be. In some cases trauma could mask your actual orientation or lead you to hypersexual behaviors, but in those cases your true orientation would emerge with therapy and dealing with your trauma. Where does that leave those of us who don't have sexual trauma, or whose trauma did not or does not affect our sexuality?
Sexuality affected by trauma, from my exposure to therapies in those spaces, is mostly about wanting to feel in control of your trauma. Sometimes that means reliving it by purposefully doing the things that were done to you.

Regardless. Biological or not. It is not a choice. I do not choose to fall in love with other women, the same way preteen girls do not choose to have crushes on boys. It just happens.
There is the argument that I am in control of my actions. Uh.... of course I am. But my orientation, the attractions and feelings I feel, will exist regardless of my actions. It's actually somewhat common for gay men to be in straight marriages before they accept or sometimes even figure out that they are not attracted to their wife or women at all.

For the record, I am also actually largely uninterested in dating women. Or men. Or anyone. I am attracted to women for sure, but I actually have next to zero interest in acting on that attraction.

 

[Tenchi]

First you say it's not biological. Then you say the research into it isn't conclusive. We don't know for sure if it's biological, but the evidence points in that direction.

I very much disagree. Simply look at a man's "plumbing" and you can see plainly what biology intends. And the research has indicated psycho-social factors, not biology, as the primary influences of homosexual behavior. Twin studies, brain studies, hormonal studies, etc. have been far from inclined to a genetic basis for this sexual deviancy.

Most people in the world are heterosexual. They are grossed out by the idea of doing anything sexual with the same sex.

Yes. I know.

Likewise, homosexuals are grossed out by the thought of doing anything with the opposite sex. Based on this knowledge, we can at least make an educated guess and say that it's probably biological.

??? I'd check your logic, here. For one, there isn't an equivalency between normal sexual behavior and abnormal sexual behavior. The former kind of sex follows behavior in keeping with human female-male, transmitter-receiver, physical features, plainly designed for reproduction, the latter does not. There is a clear biological "fit for purpose" context within which heterosexual sex occurs but none at all for homosexual sex. In fact, homosexuality acts directly against the natural purpose of male-female anatomy and biochemistry. In my view, then, heterosexual desire is normal, rooted in the physiology of male and female, while homosexual desire is a contortion, a perverting, of normal human sexual desire and purpose.

Of course. The question is, should gay people abstain from same sex relations just because it says so in the bible? I mean, celibacy for life doesn't sound healthy.

This is like asking if an adulterer should refrain from sexual relations all his life because the Bible forbids adultery. Of course not. An adulterer should have lots of sex - but within the bounds of monogamous, lifelong, heterosexual marriage that God has ordained for sex, not in adulterous affairs. Should the glutton refrain from eating because the Bible forbids gluttony? No. He should eat and enjoy doing so, just not in a gluttonous way. What about the gossip? Should the gossip abstain from all speech because the Bible condemns gossip? Obviously not. Speech isn't the problem; the wrong kind of speech (gossip) is. I'm sure you get my point.

If the research eventually proves that it's biological, will Christians let go of their current position? I think not.

It doesn't matter if there is a biological basis for homosexuality or not. There is a basic biological sexual impulse at the bottom of all sexuality whether its fornication, or adultery, or homosexuality, or even bestiality. But God doesn't say, "Your sexual impulse is biological so you can satisfy it any way you like." No, He intends, and commands, all human sexuality to be confined to lifelong, monogamous, heterosexual marriage no matter if one has powerful longings for the wife of one's neighbor, or for someone of the same sex, or for the German Shepherd next door.

Because they certainly haven't done so on issues like the age of the earth and evolution, just to name a few.

These are matters in different categories entirely and don't warrant being compared in this way. Questions on the age of the earth are far more...tertiary to daily living than questions of sexual conduct. I very much doubt God will condemn a person for thinking the earth is billions of years old. But He will most definitely throw the practicing homosexual into eternal hell, if he dies unrepentant in his sexual sin.

What purpose does research even serve if you've already reached a conclusion on an issue?

That depends upon what research you're talking about. God doesn't make any comment in His word about a person's views on the age of the earth, but He has very clear, specific, repeated and dire things to say about homosexuality.

 

[Christ_empowered]

I dunno

I think it’s a complex interplay of biological and social factors. Especially with men the gaydar issue comes into play more so than for women. But is b being softer as a tween and teen necessarily indicative of homosexuality or does society create gay dudes out of softer probably confused tween and teen males?

And I don’t mean just through sexual contact etc. I mean…speaking as a Christian who at nearly 40 is now able to glance back with more of a biblical worldview…

I really do think society itself plays a big role in creating and maintaining gay identities. Society also creates reinforces and maintains criminal identities and other deviant identities such as drug user and mental patient. And…

One big big factor Jesus Christ saves us from is the world be of good cheer for I have overcome the world …

Society itself is fallen and broken sinful and turned away from God. This has been the case since the fall of man. Jesus Christ saves and redeems individuals…

Not society as a whole. As a new creation in Christ Jesus Gods work in my life plays out in the context of a sinful society that creates winners losers criminals and druggies and mental patients…

And as with it seems all Christians His work in my life runs against worldly wisdom and expectations.

 

[Riven]

I very much disagree. Simply look at a man's "plumbing" and you can see plainly what biology intends. And the research has indicated psycho-social factors, not biology, as the primary influences of homosexual behavior. Twin studies, brain studies, hormonal studies, etc. have been far from inclined to a genetic basis for this sexual deviancy.

Looking at one's plumbing does not give you all of the information though. For example, both women and men can suffer from infertility, despite their plumbing being otherwise normal. And besides, it's pretty far away from the brain. Just saying.

??? I'd check your logic, here. For one, there isn't an equivalency between normal sexual behavior and abnormal sexual behavior. The former kind of sex follows behavior in keeping with human female-male, transmitter-receiver, physical features, plainly designed for reproduction, the latter does not. There is a clear biological "fit for purpose" context within which heterosexual sex occurs but none at all for homosexual sex. In fact, homosexuality acts directly against the natural purpose of male-female anatomy and biochemistry. In my view, then, heterosexual desire is normal, rooted in the physiology of male and female, while homosexual desire is a contortion, a perverting, of normal human sexual desire and purpose.

But why is the fact that it goes against the intended purpose such a problem? If a straight married couple only has sex for pleasure and they use protection to avoid pregnancy, is that also a perversion of God's intended purpose?

This is like asking if an adulterer should refrain from sexual relations all his life because the Bible forbids adultery. Of course not. An adulterer should have lots of sex - but within the bounds of monogamous, lifelong, heterosexual marriage that God has ordained for sex, not in adulterous affairs. Should the glutton refrain from eating because the Bible forbids gluttony? No. He should eat and enjoy doing so, just not in a gluttonous way. What about the gossip? Should the gossip abstain from all speech because the Bible condemns gossip? Obviously not. Speech isn't the problem; the wrong kind of speech (gossip) is. I'm sure you get my point.

No, it's not. Because the gay man or woman can't force themselves to be attracted to the opposite sex. There is no choice involved. However, you might be able to make a case for bisexual people though. They can certainly choose.

It doesn't matter if there is a biological basis for homosexuality or not.

And there it is. Science thrown out the window with the baby and the bath water.

These are matters in different categories entirely and don't warrant being compared in this way. Questions on the age of the earth are far more...tertiary to daily living than questions of sexual conduct.

That's a fair point.

I very much doubt God will condemn a person for thinking the earth is billions of years old. But He will most definitely throw the practicing homosexual into eternal hell, if he dies unrepentant in his sexual sin.

Then I would say God makes Hitler blush with envy with his unmatched level of cruelty. Towards those he claims to love, no less. How can you worship such a being?

 

[Riven]

View attachment 15737

This is a God that makes more sense to me.

 

[Randy]

TWO things repentance - choosing to follow Christ and the teachings of God not the world. Those that truly fear God show repentance.

How to overcome the weakness of the flesh as God understand such weaknesses? As Jesus became flesh.

The Gift of God - Christ in us. A new creation. No longer slaves to sin.

For if you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live.

Those who live according to the flesh have their minds set on what the flesh desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires. 6The mind governed by the flesh is death, but the mind governed by the Spirit is life and peace. 7The mind governed by the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so. 8Those who are in the realm of the flesh cannot please God.

You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ.


We are witnesses of these things, and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey him.”

The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children.

 

[D-D-W]

First you say it's not biological. Then you say the research into it isn't conclusive. We don't know for sure if it's biological, but the evidence points in that direction. Most people in the world are heterosexual. They are grossed out by the idea of doing anything sexual with the same sex. Likewise, homosexuals are grossed out by the thought of doing anything with the opposite sex. Based on this knowledge, we can at least make an educated guess and say that it's probably biological.

"Biological" has to do with our genetic and chromosomal make up. Since homosexuality is inherently non-reproductive it is very unlikely anything will be found on that front.

That said, I believe (and it is hinted at in several places in the OT) that we have a spiritual heritage, probably a counterpart, to physical DNA. Of course, since the existence of our spirit cannot be proved in a scientific way, there is no way that can ever be "proved."

Deuteronomy 5:9
You shall not worship them or serve them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, and on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Me,

In Luke 1.14 John the Baptizer was said to be "filled with the Holy Spirit" while still in utero. If a child can be filled with the Holy Spirit pre-birth, so can a demon inhabit a pre-born baby. I have come across those who have been demonized before birth.

Of course. The question is, should gay people abstain from same sex relations just because it says so in the bible? I mean, celibacy for life doesn't sound healthy.

No, but God has called a select few into that life. Paul calls it in 1 Cor 7 a "charismata," or special gift of grace; the same word he used in chapter 12 to describe healings, miracles, and prophecy.

 

[evenifigoalone]

This is a God that makes more sense to me.

People will always disappoint and tear others down. Loving God is worth enduring this behavior. Even if my fellow Christians hate me, I know God loves me.

 

[Randy]

Evolution isn't about explaining where the universe came from. It's about explaining how life evolved over time.

You are speaking of the context of the body only "in theory". However your spirit, "you", that which survives the life of the body was formed by God. Where your spirit ends up is in Jesus hands.

It is a possible outcome that people are deceived into the same sex attractions by certain type of evil spirits. So God may ask, "who told you that you were born gay?" What is clear is that there are "forbidden" sex acts in the law given by "God" our creator who defined what is sinful.

As in casting out demons Jesus made a comment, "this type only comes out by prayer" As in regard to different types of evil spirits.

As one who knows the Lord, not anyone in authority, I would state that forbidden sex acts in the law qualify as sexual immorality. And the sexual immoral do not enter the kingdom of God.

Jesus didn't change judgments in regard to "morality". He and the Father are one so He won't state otherwise.

Anyway if anyone really does know Him then why would they not ask Him for a judgment rather then seeking comments on a Christian forum? For in regard to judgments made it will be His words that prevail.

If one has a problem with Gods law in regard to the acts in question then their problem is not with us but with God Himself.

 

[Tenchi]

Looking at one's plumbing does not give you all of the information though. For example, both women and men can suffer from infertility, despite their plumbing being otherwise normal. And besides, it's pretty far away from the brain. Just saying.

If a person's faucet in their kitchen isn't working, does it somehow negate the purpose and correct function of the faucet? Is it reasonable for the owner of a waterless faucet, because it is waterless, to use it to sew clothes, or paint portraits? Obviously not. The faucet wasn't designed for such use and operates poorly, or not at all, in these capacities. Likewise, the circumstance of an infertile couple engaging in sex for reasons apart from reproduction doesn't justify others using the "faucet" of sex in ways that distort its proper purpose and function entirely, as homosexuals do. An infertile husband and wife having sex use their physical "plumbing" in just the way it's designed to be used. Not so homosexuals or lesbians who must resort to bizarre and sometimes damaging methods of "sex," using their bodies and various mechanical implements in ways far outside the natural design and purpose of their "plumbing."

God has made sex, not just reproductive in its purpose, but pleasurable, too, working as a kind of relational "cement," or "glue," in marriage. Even if sex between a husband and wife doesn't produce children, these other features of sex are still important to their marriage, helping to bind them to one another. It is a terrible twisting of this feature of sex for homosexual men or lesbian women to use it to bind themselves to one another in a completely illegitimate and immoral union. Read Romans 1:18-32.

But why is the fact that it goes against the intended purpose such a problem? If a straight married couple only has sex for pleasure and they use protection to avoid pregnancy, is that also a perversion of God's intended purpose?

Actually, it is a distortion of God's plan for marriage that a couple actively prevent the production of children. Clearly, God did not intend sex to be only for pleasure; the reproductive features of men and women make this abundantly obvious. God's union of husband and wife to each other is, generally, for the purpose of having and raising the next generation of people. Couples that could have children but choose to use sex only to pleasure one another are distorting God's purpose both for sex and marriage. Nations in which this practice occurs in a widespread way disappear within a few generations - as Europeans are about to discover.

No, it's not. Because the gay man or woman can't force themselves to be attracted to the opposite sex. There is no choice involved. However, you might be able to make a case for bisexual people though. They can certainly choose.

With God, all things are possible. The man whose sexual interest has been badly distorted by ANY sexual perversion is not beyond God's power to change. It is simply false - and demonic, I believe - to place behavior in the same category as physical features, making conduct as unalterable as height, or eye color. What better way to keep sinners bound in their sin than to convince them they are victims of it, bound to act as they do by an unchangeable, congenital directive. We choose our behavior and God will hold every one of us accountable for it, however much we work to deceive ourselves into thinking we are without responsibility.

Matthew 16:27
27 For the Son of Man is going to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay each person according to what he has done.

Revelation 22:12
12 “Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense with me, to repay each one for what he has done.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10
9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality,
10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

And there it is. Science thrown out the window with the baby and the bath water.

Nope. What is thrown out by God in His word is the idea that, because sinners have declared themselves not responsible for their sin, they are therefore escaped from the divine condemnation and punishment of their sin. The Christian doesn't deny, against science, the sexual nature of human beings, only the illegitimate indulgence and perversion of that sexuality.

Then I would say God makes Hitler blush with envy with his unmatched level of cruelty. Towards those he claims to love, no less. How can you worship such a being?

What you think of God has no bearing whatever on who He is and His judgment upon the wicked. Like everybody else, you're a sinner, born into sin, surrounded by sin, even loving sin. Why, then, wouldn't you reject God's condemnation of the sin with which you're so comfortable? To be sure, like all other sinners, you are the poorest judge of sin, unable to see sin and hate it as God does. Your words above, then, are exactly what I'd expect in response to the stark, uncompromising hatred God has toward all sin.

Love doesn't require approval or acceptance of sin. It is our sin that will destroy us. And so, because He loves us, God calls us all to leave off our sin and live in the manner for which He made us. It would be the height of evil for God to know that our sin will bring us to eternal punishment in hell (among other terrible things) but pretend it's all okay, accepting our soul-corrupting sin because we've deceived ourselves into thinking its inevitable and good.

I worship the holy, just God of Scripture, the wrathful Judge of sin, and Lover and Protector of the Righteous because I see Him far more clearly than you do.

1 John 1:5-6
5 This is the message we have heard from him and proclaim to you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.
6 If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth.

Revelation 21:5-8
5 And he who was seated on the throne said, “Behold, I am making all things new.” Also he said, “Write this down, for these words are trustworthy and true.”
6 And he said to me, “It is done! I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. To the thirsty I will give from the spring of the water of life without payment.
7 The one who conquers will have this heritage, and I will be his God and he will be my son.
8 But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.”

 

[Tenchi]

As memes typically do, this one enormously over-generalizes, offering a cartoonish, false dichotomy of response to the homosexual person and then insinuating a third "in-between" option that is actually entirely against the plain declaration of truth given by the Lord:

1 Corinthians 6:9-11
9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality,
10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
11 And such were some of you. 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.

2 Corinthians 5:17
17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come.

Ephesians 5:3
3 But sexual immorality and all impurity or covetousness must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints.

Ephesians 5:8-12
8 for at one time you were darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Walk as children of light
9 (for the fruit of light is found in all that is good and right and true),
10 and try to discern what is pleasing to the Lord.
11 Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.
12 For it is shameful even to speak of the things that they do in secret.

Jude 1:5-7
5 Now I want to remind you, although you once fully knew it, that Jesus, who saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe.
6 And the angels who did not stay within their own position of authority, but left their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness until the judgment of the great day—
7 just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.

The Christian who tells the homosexual the truth, that their sin will damn them to eternal hell, is not hateful and intolerant but loving. Now, of course, there are some Christians who share the truth for reasons that aren't loving, who use the truth as a club, but there will NEVER be a sinner who is delighted to hear that their cherished sin, the sin with which they identify strongly, is evil and will destroy them. Is the truth about sin to be held back across-the-board, no matter the spirit with which it is shared, because no sinner likes hearing they're headed for hell? Absolutely not. If the positive reception of the sinner to the truth about their sin is the basis upon which sharing the truth ought to be done, the truth about sin will never be shared and the sinner will go on to an eternity in the eternal isolation, darkness and torment of hell.