Biblical support for gay sex? A simple question

[Dogbean]

If I 'accepted Christ', it would be against my convictions. I can't see how a person can expediently choose to believe something they don't believe. I could only pretend to believe, and if God is omniscient, surely he'd know I was pretending? Belief is not a matter of choice.

Fair enough. I'm just trying to reach out to you. How do you know that your convictions are the moral absolute in the universe? I think belief is a matter of choice. You have chosen not to believe, and to have such deep convictions about not believing tells me that a concious choice to reject God has been made.

 

[Andreusz]

Fair enough. I'm just trying to reach out to you. How do you know that your convictions are the moral absolute in the universe? I think belief is a matter of choice. You have chosen not to believe, and to have such deep convictions about not believing tells me that a concious choice to reject God has been made.

No, I'm just naturally a sceptic. But I do believe that scepticism can be cultivated (and should be!).

 

[Dogbean]

No, I'm just naturally a sceptic. But I do believe that scepticism can be cultivated (and should be!).

So you're not concerned about the possibility of burning in hell forever? If you are a skeptic, that means you are not sure, and that means you are not 100% certain of your belief that there is no God.

 

[Andreusz]

So you're not concerned about the possibility of burning in hell forever? If you are a skeptic, that means you are not sure, and that means you are not 100% certain of your belief that there is no God.

Definitely not. But I'd put it at around 99.99999%

 

[Dogbean]

Definitely not. But I'd put it at around 99.99999%

Ok, so suppose somebody told you that there is a 0.00001% chance you will burn in agony for eternity if you continue in your sin? Wouldn't you want to cry out to God, ask Him to reveal Himself to you and enter your heart and allow Him to transform your life to eliminate that risk?

Sounds like a good deal to me.

 

[DrummerWench]

Pascal's wager, anyone? What if neither Andreusz's nor Tackleberry's beliefs are correct? Perhaps it's the Jainists who are right. Or, no, the Zoroastrians. No, no, wait--it's the Buddhists.

Reducing the choices to "atheism" or "Christianity" ignores many, many others.

 

[KCKID]

So you're not concerned about the possibility of burning in hell forever? If you are a skeptic, that means you are not sure, and that means you are not 100% certain of your belief that there is no God.

No offense intended, but I don't think that trying to convert someone to a belief that would have them tormented in hell for eternity if they don't is going to be too effective. If anything would make me want to remain an atheist if I was an atheist it would be because the one we're to love and respect would consider doing such a thing. One would stand a better chance promoting Hitler to be worshiped. At least his victims were allowed to die.

By the way, I AM a Christian but I don't believe in the traditional mainstream Christian version of hell. No way! It's cruel and barbaric!

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Just saying again, because I think its eminently fair...

I believe PARTS of the Bible are God's word. I believe other parts are the words of humans inspired by God, I believe other parts are the words of humans that were inspired by God, but have been mistranslated and misinterpreted so as to loose their original meaning, I believe some parts of the Bible are the words purely of men, with no spiritual inspiration behind them, and finally, I beklieve some parts of the Bible are the remnants of ancient oral traditions that have been mishmashed, merged, seperated, confused, added too and detracted from so often that any relation to their original context, meaning or form was lost millenia ago.

And I believe God's gift to us of inteligence and logic allows us to determine which bits fall into which category. I believe the LAST thing God wants is blind, Pharisee-like adherence to ancient texts that don't make any sense.

And since the alleged Biblical condemnations of homosexuality DON'T make any sense, certainly not in a modern context, and fail any applicable and rigorous test of logic and academy, they can be safely considered to fall into a category of "OTHER than God's word".

Now, you may, of course, disagree with me. And even better, I AM open to the possibility that I may be mistaken. The only caveat I put on that, is to say that to be convinced I am wrong, you will need to demonstrate in a logically consistant, rational way that I am wrong, and not fall back onto "B-b-but the Bible SEZ!" everytime I raise an issue that you can't comfortably answer with logic and intelect.

Can't say fairer than that, now can I?

So thats it. If you want to convice me homosexuality is wrong, I welcome your attempt to do so. All you have to do is show me a logical, consistent reason to consider it so. And if you need to respond to this with ad homs or blatant holier than thou sanctimony, I'll happily take that as the tacit admission of defeat that it is.

Its REALLY simple... LOGICAL reason to consider homosexuality wrong, or don't respond, because I'll laugh at you.

 

[Dogbean]

It's amazing how people just pick and choose the pleasant things to believe and reject the tougher parts of it because they think it's cruel and barbaric.

Like people are more moral than God, and need to correct His Word to make it not so tough to believe.

Simply amazing....

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Ok, so suppose somebody told you that there is a 0.00001% chance you will burn in agony for eternity if you continue in your sin? Wouldn't you want to cry out to God, ask Him to reveal Himself to you and enter your heart and allow Him to transform your life to eliminate that risk?

Sounds like a good deal to me.

Ah, good ole Pascal...

link to comic removed. PM me if you want to see it

 

[RMDY]

I reject practically everything the Bible says as either fictitious or deeply immoral. Yes, I'm willing to take the chance. I am a deeply convinced atheist.

Your very vague about how your calling the bible "deeply immoral". You need to be more specific. Which part of the bible are you talking about? The Old or New Covenant? The Law of Moses? Do you believe the 7 Laws of Noah are "deeply immoral"? Perhaps you believe Jesus death and resurrection is immoral? From your point of view---hey!----you might as well call the 10 commandments immoral too! Yes, its immoral to be told what is evil and what isn't! It's immoral to abstain from lusts, murders, lies, prejuries, thefts, and even relationship with God!

I'll confidentally assert that athiests do not being under authority or being told what to do? Correct?

 

[EnemyPartyII]

It's amazing how people just pick and choose the pleasant things to believe and reject the tougher parts of it because they think it's cruel and barbaric.

Like people are more moral than God, and need to correct His Word to make it not so tough to believe.

Simply amazing....

If this one is directed at me, I'd even consider an explanation for why God would make "morality" dependant on illogical commands.

I don't believe ANY of God's commands to us are illogical, therefore, if we find an illogical command, it doesn't come from God. Is this really hard for you to understand?

 

[RMDY]

Pascal's wager, anyone? What if neither Andreusz's nor Tackleberry's beliefs are correct? Perhaps it's the Jainists who are right. Or, no, the Zoroastrians. No, no, wait--it's the Buddhists.

Reducing the choices to "atheism" or "Christianity" ignores many, many others.

Something very interesting to consider is that these "world religions" such as buddism and hinduism, tend to believe, from what I heard, is that the universe is eternal---> they teach that people go through cycles of reincarnation to purify themselves from sin before they can be with God or gods. Christianity says the universe had a beginning and Christ deaths frees people from sin. Which one does science prove more? Christianity! Science and Christianity both affirm the Universe had a beginning, thus proving hinduism and buddhism is nothing more than superstition or a myth.

Historical evidence also proves christianity to be true. Intelligent design on our planet affirms an intelligent creator, something Christianity teaches. Everything in this universe exists with a cause, something Christianity affirms.

The bible is full of prophecy which shows God is in control of things, thus also proving his existence.

What religion do you want to say is right? Islam? Taoism? Buddhism? Hinduism? Flying Spegetti monster in the sky?

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Your very vague about how your calling the bible "deeply immoral". You need to be more specific. Which part of the bible are you talking about? The Old or New Covenant? The Law of Moses? Do you believe the 7 Laws of Noah are "deeply immoral"? Perhaps you believe Jesus death and resurrection is immoral? From your point of view---hey!----you might as well call the 10 commandments immoral too! Yes, its immoral to be told what is evil and what isn't! It's immoral to abstain from lusts, murders, lies, prejuries, thefts, and even relationship with God!

I'll confidentally assert that athiests do not being under authority or being told what to do? Correct?

You know? I WOULD call the 10 commandments immoral, IF looked at the way you are looking at them.

It IS immoral to be TOLD what is evil, and just expected to swallow it, no questions asked.

IMHO, genuinely moral behaviour comes from understanding and empathy. The 10 commandments are a GUIDE to help us achieve moral behaviour, not an absolute, eternal, objective commandment that applys to every situation cos "God sez!".

And I'm a devout Christian.

 

[Dogbean]

You know? I WOULD call the 10 commandments immoral, IF looked at the way you are looking at them.

It IS immoral to be TOLD what is evil, and just expected to swallow it, no questions asked.

IMHO, genuinely moral behaviour comes from understanding and empathy. The 10 commandments are a GUIDE to help us achieve moral behaviour, not an absolute, eternal, objective commandment that applys to every situation cos "God sez!".

And I'm a devout Christian.

Devout Christian, huh? You just called God immoral. And Paul, and Moses, and Peter, and Jesus, and everyone who, in the Bible, passed onto us statements from God about what is evil and what isn't.

Define a "devout Christian." In fact, why don't you give us your testimony.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Something very interesting to consider is that these "world religions" such as buddism and hinduism, tend to believe, from what I heard, is that the universe is eternal---> they teach that people go through cycles of reincarnation to purify themselves from sin before they can be with God or gods. Christianity says the universe had a beginning and Christ deaths frees people from sin. Which one does science prove more? Christianity! Science and Christianity both affirm the Universe had a beginning, thus proving hinduism and buddhism is nothing more than superstition or a myth.

Historical evidence also proves christianity to be true. Intelligent design on our planet affirms an intelligent creator, something Christianity teaches. Everything in this universe exists with a cause, something Christianity affirms.

The bible is full of prophecy which shows God is in control of things, thus also proving his existence.

What religion do you want to say is right? Islam? Taoism? Buddhism? Hinduism? Flying Spegetti monster in the sky?

With the best will in the world, I think you should maybe research a bit more about both science and world religions before you start making this sort of claim.

Hinduism certainly believes in a cyclic nature of time, while Christianity believes in a clear begining, middle and end of this universe, which seems supported by science.

However, the cyclic nature of the universe believed in by Hindus encompasses the creation and destruction of a great many universes in sequence, which is also a theoretical model of how the universe actuaaly works... that an eternal series of big bang expansions, followed by Big Crunch contractions, occurs over and over again.

Further, there are a great many other religions that believe in a Creation, then ending of the universe, the Nordic and Germanic pantheist faiths (which I have studied closely) certainly do, and, indeed, THEIR predicted end of the universe at Ragnarok, "Death by Ice", is even closer to the predicted entropy death of the universe predicted by many scientists than even the Christian Faith.

Hindu and Budhist Holy men and women have made predictions that come true, just as they perform seemingly impossible miracles. Muslims and Jews too.

Seriously, making empirical claims about the accuracy of the Christian faith without first closely examining others is opening yourself up for criticism, cos the other world religions can make just as good a claim as we can.

At the end of the day, the only way we, as Christians, can "know" we are "right", is through faith. There is no evidence the Judeo-Christian God exists.

 

[Dogbean]

What religion do you want to say is right? Islam? Taoism? Buddhism? Hinduism? Flying Spegetti monster in the sky?

Whatever religion allows them to please themselves and do whatever they want. And if none allow it, they'll pick a religion and just delete the parts they don't like. LOL

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Devout Christian, huh? You just called God immoral. And Paul, and Moses, and Peter, and Jesus, and everyone who, in the Bible, passed onto us statements from God about what is evil and what isn't.

Define a "devout Christian." In fact, why don't you give us your testimony.

I didn't call "God immoral". I said a legalist interpretation of the 10 commandments is immoral.

Can you see the difference?

What would you like me to testify about specifically?

 

[Dogbean]

At the end of the day, the only way we, as Christians, can "know" we are "right", is through faith. There is no evidence the Judeo-Christian God exists.

With each post, you just open yourself up more and more to very easy attacks.

If there is no "proof" that the judeo-Christian God exists, why do you follow Him? As you said "I'm a devout Christian" and your signature says you're a Christian. Why follow a God who you don't have proof for? Something is making you worship Him, but you said there's no proof..... care to elaborate on this flawed reasoning?

 

[EnemyPartyII]

With each post, you just open yourself up more and more to very easy attacks.

If there is no "proof" that the judeo-Christian God exists, why do you follow Him? As you said "I'm a devout Christian" and your signature says you're a Christian. Why follow a God who you don't have proof for? Something is making you worship Him, but you said there's no proof..... care to elaborate on this flawed reasoning?

There is no proof. But I have FAITH.

Might I direct you to John 20:29?

"Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."

Of course, if you have any actual empirical evidence that the Christian religion is the true and verifiable, it would certainly ease my long dark teatimes of the soul. But I've asked for empirical evidence before, and the promised examples always turn out to be incredibly vague, usually couched in bluster. But please, if you have access to some evidence I havn't seen before, I'd sincerely love to see it.