For Acharya's Main Website, go to

TBK News Table of Contents

Bookmark and Share
Join the TBK Mailing List!
Enter your name and email address below to receive news and cutting edge commentary from Acharya!

Subscribe  Unsubscribe 

Monday, March 20, 2006

I Can Only Imagine God is Gay!

I don't know how many of you have heard this song, but I've heard it a bit too much. Really, I can't imagine why someone would write or sing - much less play - such a song, but it's been going on in one way or another for so long... Centuries, in fact - that it's almost something to be ignored. Except that it bludgeons us on a daily basis and is thus worthy of commentary.

This commentary is in specific response to the song "I Can Only Imagine" by MercyMe. Now, perhaps I am in such a cultural backwater that this ditty is rarely played elsewhere. I truly hope so! If that's the case, please allow me to reproduce here the pertinent lyrics:

I can only imagine
What it will be like
When I walk
By Your side
I can only imagine
What my eyes will see
When Your face
Is before me
I can only imagine

Surrounded by Your glory, what will my heart feel
Will I dance for You Jesus or in awe of You be still
Will I stand in Your presence or to my knees will I fall
Will I sing hallelujah, will I be able to speak at all
I can only imagine

I can only imagine
When that day comes
And I find myself
Standing in the Son
I can only imagine
When all I will do
Is forever
Forever worship You
I can only imagine


Okay now, I do not wish to denigrate anyone of any particular "gender inclination" or assorted state, but, oh gosh, does it not seem a bit, well, queer - that is, gay - to be singing such a love song to a man? Truly, I don't want to offend anyone, but this song - and the passion and emotion contained therein - seem a tad homoerotic, to say the least. I hope such frankness will not get me blacklisted with the Berkeley crowd. But, can we please be a bit more politically correct and culturally dignified here? Should not heterosexual men be interested in "the Goddess," rather than effeminate rabblerousing males, with or without long hair?

I can only imagine a time when men were men and women were, well, stimulated.


Anonymous said...

A little off topic but the line "Standing in the SON" is a bit of a giveaway! :)

Anonymous said...

I've never understood the holy trinity. God AND Jesus existing at the same time? As far as the homoerotic connotation goes, I see it as more a 'perverse' relationship some xians 'think' they have with their god. Yucky! But no more so than drinking the blood and eating the body...

Amos Keppler said...

Yet another contradiction in christian "teaching".

Dr. W. Sumner Davis said...

Xian teaching? I love that. As if Xians ever really learn anything. Like the Hitler youth were all seeking "education."

Anonymous said...

What a wonderful idea with this blog. It is because of wonderful intelligent, witty, free thinking sexual women like you that makes me glad to be a man so I can enjoy and live everyday to the max.

I am an american fundamentalist said...


Anonymous said...

Ha ha ha! I'm laughing on the outside but the suggestion that women are not being stimulated has me crying on the inside.

Seriously, the Christian Bible seems filled with what we would call homoerotic references. I don't think its any surprise that so many priests turn out to be gay (why they turn out to be child molesters is another matter). The priesthood and Christianity is almost designed as a refuge for repressed homosexuals. The obsession Republicans, "the party of god", have with gay sex even though Jesus, the "bridegroom of the church" who was tempted with everything but a woman if I recall correctly, never mentions it, I think proves the point.
Their obsession is almost as intense as their desire to make women state controlled incubators even as they choke off access to contraceptives.
Waiiit a minute. Maybe the plan is to make men so afraid to have sex with women they'll turn to...”Republicans” for comfort.
Hmmmm. Crafty.

Anonymous said...

Sorry, but as a fan I'm disappointed in you for this posting. Did you intend to appeal to the homophobic (and juvenile) element among your readers? One post says that gays 'make you sick' - do you agree? Another says the song is 'perverse' and 'yucky' and another talks about the 'closet homos'. I doubt that you intended to encourage these stupid remarks. It shows that atheists and non-Christians can be just as intolerant as the bible thumpers. Why does it bother you that the singer is attracted to the man he is singing about? So what? There are worse things than a love song to complain about. By the way, gay people everywhere, not only in Berkeley, don't like to put down and ridiculed (do you?).

Acharya S said...


Sorry you feel that way, but the point remains well taken - why are all these supposedly heterosexual men pining for a male god? Why aren't they focused on the female? How about a goddess? Something is askew here, and it doesn't make for a healthy humanity. One look at the sad behavior of Ted Haggard should show you that. Do I think that's healthy? No, I do not.

I do believe a little lightening up is in order here. I for one have a sense of humor, and I intend to continue using it to show the folly of humanity.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for your reply. Ted ("Satan made me do it!") Haggard is definitely not psychologically healthy! IMO, he is a sexually repressed and confused man. Not surprising, since his pathetic excuse for a religion tells him he's sick and perverse. I'm still not getting your point though... Christians, especailly Catholics, have worshipped a goddess-like figure for centuries - Mary. But Catholics aren't exactly enlightened on social issues that affect women, like birth control or women priests. Isn't the problem really the male-dominated patriarchal church? It seems they devalue all that's female, including men who have feminine qualities. (Except that the Pope gets to wear a dress!) The way I see it, the source of homophobia is really the hatred of the feminine qualities (like love, tenderness, nurturing - those awful things) that men try to repress in themselves. Yes, I really would like to lighten up too! But it's hard to laugh when some moron is calling you 'perverse' and 'sick' - don't ya think? I guess I hoped for a 'higher' level of discussion on this blog, but *some* of the bloggers on this topic reminded me of junior high school. :-)

Acharya S said...

I don't think there was any intention as such by commentators on this site to assail homosexuality per se, "simply" the lack of recognition of homoeroticism of Christianity in particular - that's what is sickening.

One of the main points of my rant is the sexism inherent in modern religious doctrine. Regardless of the female figures such as Mary, the three major monoliths that are affecting us - Judaism, Christianity and Islam - are backwardly sexist, like a bunch of knuckledraggers. Those who created these religions are so misogynistic that they are unhealthy - and their misogyny is often accompanied by latent homosexuality, regardless of the source of it, that is denied and repressed to the point of imbalance and, yes, perversion. The classic example of this repression=obsession=perversion is the raping of children, male and female, by Catholic priests. To call this child-rape anything but perversion is to toss morality to the wind.

So, there are several issues under discussion here.

Anonymous said...

Thanks again for responding with your thoughts. You are so right that misogyny is perverse and that it's rampant in the history of the Big 3 monotheistic religions. So keep on ranting!! If Mary the "Mother of Christ" reappeared on earth today, she wouldn't be allowed to hold a position of religious leadership in the Catholic church! It's bizarre that 1 billion Catholics still accept this. Islam seems to be even more misogynistic and homophobic. Last year Iran executed two teenage boys, 18 and 17, by hanging, simply for being gay. That is sickening to me and I'm sure to you as well. Could the hatred in the Iranian executioners be due to their latent repressed homosexuality? I doubt it, but I guess it's possible. The vast majority of closeted gays are just hurting their own happiness, not molesting or killing anyone. What are your views on the other religions? Are they any better? Thailand is a Buddhist country known for the exploitation of young people in the prostitution industry. Has Buddhism or Hinduism promoted misogyny too?

Acharya S said...

I agree that it is vile to take someone's life simply because they are gay. One of my dear supporters was mercilessly beaten, sustaining long-term nerve and brain damage, because he dared to be a gay bar.

Yes, I consider Buddhism to be sexist, and certainly the sexploitation in Buddhist countries is as appalling as it is anywhere. Hinduism can be very chauvinistic as well.

Anonymous said...

lol...yeah the only reason christians have wives in the first place is so they can have children to brainwash into thinking that there's some god person who will send them to a lake of fire if they don't lick his boots, worship, praise, and honor his silly son. religions of all kind are nothing but the imagination at work!

grampadave said...

It has been hypothesized that the personage commonly known as Jesus of Nazareth may have been gay. If one considers the words: "Take and eat; this is my body." it's not hard(pun unintentional) to see why some think this.

The Trinity said...

And don't forget that 144,000 all male BALLless Sorry, I mean castrated choir.

Vikram M said...

Hi Acharya,

I agree totally that a hetrosexual male should be interested in the goddess.

Check out this absolutely KILLER homo passage from this book named 'Tantric Healing' by Sadhu Santideva.

The passage describes the experiences of some hindu saint named Ramakrishna who's kundalini has risen.

Page 80:

This is a very secret experience. I saw a boy, 22 or 23 years old, exactly resembling me, enter the susumna nerve, and commune with the lotuses, touching them with his tongue. He began with the centre at the a minus, and passed through the centers of the sexual organs, navel, and so on. The different lotuses of those centers, four petalled, six petalled, and so forth, had been drooping. At his touch they stood erect. [o_O]

When he reached the heart - I distinctly remember it - and communed with the lotus there, touching it with his tongue, the twelve petalled lotus, which was hanging head down, stood erect and opened its petals. [LMAO!]

Then he came to the sixteen petalled lotus in the throat, and the two petalled lotus in the forehead.

[Licking all the way of course.]

And at last, the thousand petalled lotus in the head blossomed.

[Not surprised that his thousand petalled lotus exploded could it not. LoL!]

Acharya S said...

Oh puke! What a fake way of having gay sex. If you're going to do it, at least be real.

That's like the abundant stories I've heard about Sai Baba - yep, he needed loads of young men's sperm in order to do "black magic."

Vikram M said...

Thanks, Acharya, for these wonderful and enlightening discussions.

That Osho quote you posted, and your analysis, and this blog entry - have confirmed my suspicions.

If we leave aside religion for a minute:

When I was 14-15, I noticed certain behaviour patterns in many of my male peers, patterns that did not exist in me. They were much more conscious of each other, than I was, of males around me.

I never really paid much attention to it. But now when I look back, there are things I understand about many of the things I saw....

Grown up males can hide themselves behind a facade, but not young males, who are transparent, so that era - age 14 - 22, is a vast resource of knowledge.

Coming back to religion:

I sometimes spend time at the ISKCON temple in New Delhi, its about 4 kilometres from where I stay.

I like the food, the ambiance, the architecture. Good atmosphere. I participate in the prayers, and other misc. functions at the temple.

I am not being taken over by the imaginary Krishna or some 'guru'....not possible, because I am hetrosexual. :-P

Here's a list of phrases that are very common in Krishna religious discouses:

1. "The das has to learn how to serve Krishna. Submit To Krishna. Please Krishna."

2. The Das has to submit humbly to the vaishnav guru. Look up to the guru. Worship him. Obey him without questions.

They are also VERY fond of talking about the various ways in which the guru punishes the disciple, if the disciple fails a lesson or asks dumb questions or does not obey.

Almost as if they love being punished by the Spiritual Guru.

I dont think its childish talk. They are not children. Its a clear case of BDSM fantasies being expressed.

Das means 'Servant' in sanskrit. Most Krishna devotees have 'Das' at the end of their spiritual names.

All said and done, I am not against them. Or their lifestyle choice. As long as they dont force an unwilling person to participate.

Acharya S said...

Yes, Vikram, it is all very homoerotic. Remember the Muslim/Sufi poet Rumi? His poems are likewise very homoerotic.

Projecting homoerotic sexual fantasies on a male god - it's apparently quite common. Think about all the exhortations against homosexuality by Christian preachers - they make it sound like homosexual behavior is a "delicious temptation" that needs to be resisted with all one's might. Well now, homosexuality would only represent a "delicious temptation" if you have homosexual proclivities in the first place, eh? No heterosexuals feel as is homosexuality is a "delicious temptation" to be resisted with all one's might - it appears that many preachers do, however.

What kind of "intelligent design" is this?