Where's God?

[Clizby WampusCat]

Homosexual "marriage' does not contribute to the ongoing production and raising of children in an optimum way. The Government would want to encourage real marriage which does those things otherwise the society could greatly weaken and eventually even die out. Sociological studies of different societies has shown this to be true.

So what? Where does it say everyone needs to contribute to the ongoing production and raising of children?

The government defines "real" marriage and the supreme court has said homosexual marriage is a "real" marriage. You can do or believe anything you want about marriage but you cannot deny to others what the government says they have a right to.

 

[Ed1wolf]

Yet it is a big deal. Being recognized by the government has advantages that they would be denied without a good reason. This is discrimination and the Supreme Court said was not allowed by any state.

The government discriminates against many types of "marriages". You cant marry your daughter, your son, your dog, or your cat, or your computer. And there are more people that want to do these things than you realize and they are growing everyday as marriage is gradually destroyed by inventions like gay "marriage".

 

[Ed1wolf]

Ok, so your God could react in one of two ways. He can either want him to suffer, which you say will promote spiritual growth, or he can want him to stop suffering and lose the associated spiritual growth. Are there times when your God wants people to suffer with the spiritual growth, instead of being healed without the growth? Yes or no, please.

Yes, and sometimes being healed promotes spiritual growth. It depends on the person, everyones spiritual growth is different.

dm: Of course we have a rational reason for morality. We help each other because it helps them and us. I wrote in detail explaining that. Did you read it?

But ultimately it is just subjective feelings for other humans, it is not based on anything objective. And if atheistic evolution is true, then there is no rational basis for treating humans better than any other species other than you are a member of that species.

dm: But you cannot give a good reason why people should help heal a person when it might actually be better for the person to suffer. All you can do is say to do good because it is your duty.

Humans dont have any idea which person is which, only God knows. So we as Christians are commanded to do good to everyone out of love for humans and God.

 

[Ed1wolf]

Ok, could it be best for the person to suffer so he get spiritual growth? You seem to be saying that it is.

Again, if God know it is best to suffer because it brings growth, then the doctors are doing the opposite of what is best for him. And when I asked you why they are doing what God knows is not best for him, all you could think of was that they do it because that is what they are supposed to do.

Again, I say to stop suffering, because it is best to stop suffering.

As I state in my post above, humans dont know which person should get which. We are just commanded by God to love everyone and do good for them. There is no need to worry about what is best for each person in a spiritual sense in this case, God will make sure that what happens is the right outcome for that particular person.

 

[ViaCrucis]

But this sounds like people doing there job, not God.

From the viewpoint of many religious people (not necessarily just Christians) the "hand of God" isn't so much found in "OH WOW" supernatural moments and events, but in the meager and in the mundane.

As such there's no dichotomy here, between people and God. As though it must be on or the other. The answer, from a place of faith, of whether this was the work of God or the actions of people is yes. Built into the fabric of the Abrahamic religious traditions is that human beings have a divinely-granted purpose and privilege to be the the image of God.

I'm sure most by now have heard the old story of the man who asks God to send someone to help people, and meets people and does nothing, only to one day die and stand before God asking, "Why didn't you send anyone to help?" only to be given the reply, "I did, I sent you."

This line of thinking runs right though the Abrahamic religions, that God is not so other as to be absent from the ordinary; but just the opposite, that God is so present in the ordinary that it takes faith to recognize it.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Goonie]

Playing Skee-ball.

 

[BigV]

We were discussing the golden calf event approximately 1400 years before the betrayal of Christ. But if you want to talk about Judas, remorse is just the first step. After remorse you have to repent, Judas never did.

This is a pharisaical hair splitting. Well, Judas didn't cry long enough, or didn't feel remorse long enough.

I thought Jesus was supposed to be meeting people half way? But no, I think he may actually like torturing people. Remember, majority of humanity will end up in Hell, as Jesus watches on, looking for "proper repentance".

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

The government discriminates against many types of "marriages". You cant marry your daughter, your son, your dog, or your cat, or your computer. And there are more people that want to do these things than you realize and they are growing everyday as marriage is gradually destroyed by inventions like gay "marriage".

Yes because society has agreed that they are immoral for various reasons and should not be granted the right to marry. Society doe snot view gay marriage as immoral, why should it be? They are two consenting adults that want to get married.

How does God know when someone is married? Does God require a marriage certificate from a government?

 

[ViaCrucis]

We were discussing the golden calf event approximately 1400 years before the betrayal of Christ. But if you want to talk about Judas, remorse is just the first step. After remorse you have to repent, Judas never did.

The tragedy with Judas is that he ended his life in despair; the reality of his betrayal overcame him with grief and so he took his own life.

It is sometimes popular to regard Judas as so particularly heinous to have been beyond redemption; but of course that simply is not true. Had Judas not been so overcome with despair that he took his own life, Judas Iscariot the betrayer could have been St. Judas Iscariot the Apostle. This is not something to revile Judas over, but rather to lament. To lament the tragedy of Judas' story.

And--and I believe this is very important--that we believe and confess emphatically in the kindness of mercy of God. If there was, and is, no hope for Judas, then there isn't much hope for any of us. For Christians have, all of us, betrayed the Son of God now and then in our lives, and very often for far much less than thirty pieces of silver.

Salvation isn't a step by step process. Salvation is the outpouring of grace upon a sinful world from God, through Christ. The thief on the cross full of remorse does not so much as "repent" as to acknowledge his guilt as a brigand, and implore Christ to remember him. But what does Christ say? "Today you will be with Me in paradise." That is, "You will be counted among the righteous". What did the thief do to earn this? Nothing. What steps did the thief do to achieve this? None. Rather the Son of God speaks, and it is the mercy of God that breaks through.

The ultimate fate of Judas is not known. Nobody in the Church is in any position to say or to know what happened to Judas after he took his own life. Dantie Alighieri may have placed Judas, along with Brutus and Cassius who betrayed Caesar, in the deepest level of hell, in the circle of the traitors, with Judas positioned as the single most damned of any man; but Dante's work of fiction is not theology, it is fiction. Nobody in the Church can judge the fate of any man, not even the man who betrayed Christ. Judgement belongs exclusively to Christ, the Savior and Lord of all, which is a glorious thing, for we have not a God of anger, but a God of compassion and mercy. And we all must put our hope and trust in God's merciful judgment which is found in and through Christ, who gave Himself for all, in order that all should live.

I would argue that the Church must, indeed, pray that when all is said and done, there too shall be Judas, healed and bandaged from his self-inflicted wounds of betrayal, in the brightness of God's uncreated light and love in that future world.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[doubtingmerle]

Homosexual "marriage' does not contribute to the ongoing production and raising of children in an optimum way. The Government would want to encourage real marriage which does those things otherwise the society could greatly weaken and eventually even die out. Sociological studies of different societies has shown this to be true.

Uh, this world has too many people, not too few. If anything, governments should encourage fewer children.

 

[Ed1wolf]

It was less a question and more of a loaded strawman with a question mark at the end. Meanwhile you conveniently avoided the fact that so often those who rail against homosexuality, are themselves gay, and they overtly preach hate against it to suppress who they really are.

Of course, there are some gays that take out their anger at themselves on other gays and that is wrong and sad. What hate have I preached? Myself and other Christians love gays and want the best for them in this world and the next. I am a sinner just like a gay person. My great weakness is in the area of sex too. It is just my sin is in the opposite direction, I sometimes have wrong heterosexual desires. If we hated gays, we would just ignore them and let them go to hell.

 

[Ed1wolf]

Can you quote those verses?

Exodus 22:21-24, Lev. 19:33-34, and Exodus 23:9 among others.

cw: Lev. 25 is written to the Israelite's.

The Lord said to Moses at Mount Sinai, 2 “Speak to the Israelites and say to them: ‘When you enter the land I am going to give you, the land itself must observe a sabbath to the Lord. 3 For six years sow your fields, and for six years prune your vineyards and gather their crops. 4 But in the seventh year the land is to have a year of sabbath rest, a sabbath to the Lord. Do not sow your fields or prune your vineyards. 5 Do not reap what grows of itself or harvest the grapes of your untended vines. The land is to have a year of rest. 6 Whatever the land yields during the sabbath year will be food for you—for yourself, your male and female servants, and the hired worker and temporary resident who live among you, 7 as well as for your livestock and the wild animals in your land. Whatever the land produces may be eaten.

8 “‘Count off seven sabbath years—seven times seven years—so that the seven sabbath years amount to a period of forty-nine years. 9 Then have the trumpet sounded everywhere on the tenth day of the seventh month; on the Day of Atonement sound the trumpet throughout your land. 10 Consecrate the fiftieth year and proclaim liberty throughout the land to all its inhabitants. It shall be a jubilee for you; each of you is to return to your family property and to your own clan. 11 The fiftieth year shall be a jubilee for you; do not sow and do not reap what grows of itself or harvest the untended vines. 12 For it is a jubilee and is to be holy for you; eat only what is taken directly from the fields.

13 “‘In this Year of Jubilee everyone is to return to their own property.

14 “‘If you sell land to any of your own people or buy land from them, do not take advantage of each other. 15 You are to buy from your own people on the basis of the number of years since the Jubilee. And they are to sell to you on the basis of the number of years left for harvesting crops. 16 When the years are many, you are to increase the price, and when the years are few, you are to decrease the price, because what is really being sold to you is the number of crops. 17 Do not take advantage of each other, but fear your God. I am the Lord your God.

18 “‘Follow my decrees and be careful to obey my laws, and you will live safely in the land. 19 Then the land will yield its fruit, and you will eat your fill and live there in safety. 20 You may ask, “What will we eat in the seventh year if we do not plant or harvest our crops?” 21 I will send you such a blessing in the sixth year that the land will yield enough for three years. 22 While you plant during the eighth year, you will eat from the old crop and will continue to eat from it until the harvest of the ninth year comes in.

23 “‘The land must not be sold permanently, because the land is mine and you reside in my land as foreigners and strangers. 24 Throughout the land that you hold as a possession, you must provide for the redemption of the land.

25 “‘If one of your fellow Israelites becomes poor and sells some of their property, their nearest relative is to come and redeem what they have sold. 26 If, however, there is no one to redeem it for them but later on they prosper and acquire sufficient means to redeem it themselves, 27 they are to determine the value for the years since they sold it and refund the balance to the one to whom they sold it; they can then go back to their own property. 28 But if they do not acquire the means to repay, what was sold will remain in the possession of the buyer until the Year of Jubilee. It will be returned in the Jubilee, and they can then go back to their property.

29 “‘Anyone who sells a house in a walled city retains the right of redemption a full year after its sale. During that time the seller may redeem it. 30 If it is not redeemed before a full year has passed, the house in the walled city shall belong permanently to the buyer and the buyer’s descendants. It is not to be returned in the Jubilee. 31 But houses in villages without walls around them are to be considered as belonging to the open country. They can be redeemed, and they are to be returned in the Jubilee.

32 “‘The Levites always have the right to redeem their houses in the Levitical towns, which they possess. 33 So the property of the Levites is redeemable—that is, a house sold in any town they hold—and is to be returned in the Jubilee, because the houses in the towns of the Levites are their property among the Israelites. 34 But the pastureland belonging to their towns must not be sold; it is their permanent possession.

35 “‘If any of your fellow Israelites become poor and are unable to support themselves among you, help them as you would a foreigner and stranger, so they can continue to live among you. 36 Do not take interest or any profit from them, but fear your God, so that they may continue to live among you. 37 You must not lend them money at interest or sell them food at a profit. 38 I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt to give you the land of Canaan and to be your God.

39 “‘If any of your fellow Israelites become poor and sell themselves to you, do not make them work as slaves. 40 They are to be treated as hired workers or temporary residents among you; they are to work for you until the Year of Jubilee. 41 Then they and their children are to be released, and they will go back to their own clans and to the property of their ancestors. 42 Because the Israelites are my servants, whom I brought out of Egypt, they must not be sold as slaves. 43 Do not rule over them ruthlessly, but fear your God.

44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.

47 “‘If a foreigner residing among you becomes rich and any of your fellow Israelites become poor and sell themselves to the foreigner or to a member of the foreigner’s clan, 48 they retain the right of redemption after they have sold themselves. One of their relatives may redeem them: 49 An uncle or a cousin or any blood relative in their clan may redeem them. Or if they prosper, they may redeem themselves. 50 They and their buyer are to count the time from the year they sold themselves up to the Year of Jubilee. The price for their release is to be based on the rate paid to a hired worker for that number of years. 51 If many years remain, they must pay for their redemption a larger share of the price paid for them. 52 If only a few years remain until the Year of Jubilee, they are to compute that and pay for their redemption accordingly. 53 They are to be treated as workers hired from year to year; you must see to it that those to whom they owe service do not rule over them ruthlessly.

54 “‘Even if someone is not redeemed in any of these ways, they and their children are to be released in the Year of Jubilee, 55 for the Israelites belong to me as servants. They are my servants, whom I brought out of Egypt. I am the Lord your God.

God is speaking to the Isrealites.

Yes, and God and Moses knew that there were non-Hebrews among the Israelites even when they left Egypt many Egyptians went with them. And also God knew in the future that strangers and foreigners would settle in Israel in the future. So the term "all the inhabitants of the land" plainly meant non Hebrews and foreigners from surrounding lands. So yes, all the slaves were freed. Hebrews could be freed after just six years.

cw: You have other passages that I have quoted that state that the non Hebrew slaves are not to be released on the year of Jubilee. These verses are in contradiction. Why do you get to pick the ones that say they are to be released (which I disagree with) over the verses that say they are not?

If you are referring to the verses that state their enslavement was forever that was hyperbole for either until death or jubilee.

cw; This is not what it says does it. Nowhere in the text doe sit say a judge has to order the beating. You are reaching and denying what the text actually says.

True, but if it is found out that the master was too harsh he could be punished according to lex talonis by a judge.
↑

cw: Nope. Read Marx if you want his take on things but you don't get to then say that any other atheist agrees with him just because both are atheists. Theists perform terrorism in the name of their God, I don't assume you agree with them.

No, but it is an atheist based political philosophy. Most theists that perform terrorism are not Christians, most are Muslims over 90%.

cw: That is absurd. Then in the ultimate sense christian morality is the same as all other religions morality.

No, because Christian morality is based on the objective existing moral character of the True Creator God. There are no other creator gods.

cw: That is ridiculous. Humanists and communists have different goals for morality. Communism as actually practiced are not humanists and do not have the same moral goals. Show me one communist country ever that put humanist morals into practice.

The goals may be slightly different. But their source for morality is the same, humans. That is what humanism means. Humanity is the measure of all things. But humanists from western nations generally borrow their morality from Christians up to a point but then look to what feels right to them for the rest. While humanists that like communism get their morality primarily from Marx.

 

[doubtingmerle]

God will make sure that what happens is the right outcome for that particular person.

So thousands of people suffer from COVID, leaving their bodies damaged for life. And God know that this is the right outcome for that particular person?

And thousands suffer and die of COVID, leaving their families devastated. And God know that this is the right outcome for that particular person?

And thousands of children are sexually abused by adults. And God know that this is the right outcome for that particular person?

Pardon me. What kind of a God do you worship?

humans dont know which person should get which. We are just commanded by God to love everyone and do good for them

I have pointed out several times that you say that. Every time I point out that you say it you deny it. Then you say it again.

Your God may know that it is best for a child to suffer from a disease or physical abuse. And your God may command people to help that child. But, according to your words, your God knows that it is best if the disease or abuse continues.

In your view, your God commands people to help the abused child, not because God wants the abuse to stop, but because God commands it. Your morality is all about following commands, not about ending the suffering.

My morality sees a sometimes hostile world, sees that these things are not the right outcome for people, and works to have better outcomes.

 

[doubtingmerle]

Yes, and sometimes being healed promotes spiritual growth. It depends on the person, everyones spiritual growth is different.

You say this in response to, "Are there times when your God wants people to suffer with the spiritual growth, instead of being healed without the growth?"

That is exactly what I told you that you were saying, that God sometimes wants people to suffer. Now, in spite of all those denials on this thread, you admit that God often wants people to suffer.

In context we were talking about suffering that is so severe that it leads to death or permanent crippling bodily harm. And you tell us God often wants that because of the resulting good.

If God wants that person to suffer, can you give us a compelling reason why humans should work to stop the suffering that God wants?

But ultimately it is just subjective feelings for other humans, it is not based on anything objective.

Subjective feelings that humanity is good are a good enough reason for me. Viewing humanity as good, and knowing there are things I can do to help other humans, I help. Do you have a problem with that?

 

[Ed1wolf]

So what? Where does it say everyone needs to contribute to the ongoing production and raising of children?

In order to continue the survival of a society in an optimal way, a good government should encourage it. Look what is happening in Europe. Their culture and survival as free nations are in the balance because they have failed to do so.

cw: The government defines "real" marriage and the supreme court has said homosexual marriage is a "real" marriage.

No, according to our founding documents our nation is based and founded on the laws of Nature and the (laws) of Natures God.... Both the laws of Nature and the laws of Natures God only allow for real marriage, ie marriage based on biology and anatomy.

cw: You can do or believe anything you want about marriage but you cannot deny to others what the government says they have a right to.

The government and SCOTUS was wrong in this case. They cannot make up rights that dont exist. It has made many wrong decisions such as Dred Scott and Roe v. Wade being among the most notorious. Christians have a right work through legitimate processes to correct such erroneous rulings or at least make them less odious out of love for our nation and its founding.

 

[Ed1wolf]

[STAFF EDITED DELETED QUOTE]
As a Christian we are commanded to be concerned about all peoples present and future welfare and it is the governments concern about the survival of society. Emotional? In what way have I been emotional? I think you are reading your emotions into my responses given much of your life has been invested into the lifestyle and defending it. I have no reason to be emotional about it. I know ultimately everything works out according to Gods will. However, I do get a little sad about how gays are destroying themselves by their lifestyle and how the Establishment tries to cover up this destruction thereby contributing to their broken bodies and lives, see the study I posted earlier in this thread.

 

[Ed1wolf]

This is a pharisaical hair splitting. Well, Judas didn't cry long enough, or didn't feel remorse long enough.

Uhh, you obviously dont know the difference between remorse and repentance. Remorse is just feeling sorry for something you have done and often includes feeling sorry for oneself which appears to be what happened with Judas since he committed suicide. Repentance is asking God for forgiveness and then striving never to do the deed again.

bv: I thought Jesus was supposed to be meeting people half way? But no, I think he may actually like torturing people.

As someone who was actually tortured himself that is absurd.

bv: Remember, majority of humanity will end up in Hell, as Jesus watches on, looking for "proper repentance".

Actually the Bible does not explicitly teach that the majority of humanity will end up in hell. Jesus does not watch what is going on in hell, He already knows. If you are in hell, the time for repentance is past.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

I'm afraid I've has a rather busy period recently, and have not been able to reply. I'm sorry to have kept you waiting. But I'm pleased to see that @Clizby WampusCat has rebutted you on the slavery question. So to answer your objections to gay marriage:

No, I am saying on what basis besides subjective emotion are you restricting marriage to only those who consent? Actually, requiring consent for marriage is a Christian principle borrowed by the secular humanists. But they have knocked out the rationally objective foundation to the principle.

Ignoring the red herring there, the salient point is that you do agree that a marriage should be based on consent. So, that answers your question: no marriage between adults and children, animals, plants or inanimate objects, because none of them are able to give consent.
Therefore, your slippery slope argument is invalid. But even if it wasn't, it still wouldn't matter; the point is whether it is moral to deny marriage rights to gay people. And it isn't.

Yes, that is a Christian principle. So that Christian principle you are going to arbitrarily keep but not the other principles about marriage being only a man and a woman because you feel sorry for gays.

Society has no need to base its laws on anything Christians believe. You're welcome to be bigoted against gay people if you like. Just don't expect religion to have any say in the laws of the land.

No, the definition of marriage goes beyond just a personal relationship. For society marriage has always had a functional aspect to it. Gays cannot engage in sexual intercourse. Legally in the past, a marriage was annulled if it wasn't consummated by sexual intercourse. Gays cannot perform that act, which also involves a real union of persons. Two homosexuals cannot form a true union, only a heterosexual couple can joint together biologically to form a single reproductive unit, irrespective if the unit actually produces children. Only the heterosexual union is actually recognized by biology.

Ah. So a marriage is not valid in your eyes if it cannot produce children? So people who are too old to produce children, or infertile for some reason, or who choose not to produce children - they shouldn't be allowed to marry either?
Of course, nobody checks with straight people who wish to marry that they are capable of and willing to bear children. Therefore, your argument falls apart.

Of course not, an apple is still an apple even if it has a worm in it.

"of course" you should not annul marriages of people who cannot or will not have children? Fine. Then we agree that you do not have to be able or willing to have children in order to get married.
Or are you willing to follow your arguments to their logical conclusion? If your objection to gay marriage is that it cannot produce children, do you then think that all straight couples who cannot have children should not have the right to get married?

No, atheism is an intrinsic component of Communism, read Marx.

Atheism may be an intrinsic component of Communism, but Communism is in no way an intrinsic component of atheism. All atheism means is "does not believe in Gods". Therefore, to say that you have the right to free speech because you were born in a Christian nation not an atheist one makes no sense. And that's ignoring the fact that many Christian nations throughout history took a very dim view of free speech, and that it's the values produced by the Enlightenment and liberal democracy that you have to thank.

Yes, but they dont have an objective foundation for that belief and that causes a slippery slope. That is what happened in Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, among other nations that abandoned their Christian founding principles.

An interesting side debate, but let's stay on topic. Here's the point you refused to answer again:
"Being an atheist says just as much about you as being a theist: it has nothing to do with your morality. An atheist could be an anarchist, a communist or a humanist. A theist could worship God, Allah or Satan. You'll find that humanists have a very active conscience and believe in freedom of speech very strongly."
Do you concede this, and that therefore it makes no sense for you to speak of "atheist countries" that deny rights to free speech?

No the overwhelming majority of thinkers they utilized were Christians and the Bible. While it was not founded as officially a Christian nation, they did deliberately found it on many Christian principles. This can be seen in the DOI and the Bill of Rights.

Thank you for that concession. You're quite right: the United States of America was not founded as a Christian nation. In fact, the Founding Fathers were strongly influenced by deist principles. In a more modern age, many of them would undoubtedly have been atheists and agnostics.
The Encyclopaedia Britannica explains it clearly and briefly: The Founding Fathers, Deism, and Christianity.
"Although orthodox Christians participated at every stage of the new republic, Deism influenced a majority of the Founders. The movement opposed barriers to moral improvement and to social justice. It stood for rational inquiry, for skepticism about dogma and mystery, and for religious toleration. Many of its adherents advocated universal education, freedom of the press, and separation of church and state. If the nation owes much to the Judeo-Christian tradition, it is also indebted to Deism, a movement of reason and equality that influenced the Founding Fathers to embrace liberal political ideals remarkable for their time."
Basically, these are the values of humanists. Good for them!

 

[InterestedAtheist]

If you are in hell, the time for repentance is past.

Why?

 

[BigV]

Uhh, you obviously dont know the difference between remorse and repentance. Remorse is just feeling sorry for something you have done and often includes feeling sorry for oneself which appears to be what happened with Judas since he committed suicide. Repentance is asking God for forgiveness and then striving never to do the deed again.

Uhm.. Judas never did the deed again. He was so remorseful that he thought he had no chance of getting forgiven. He did admit to commiting a sin too.

Again, you are splitting hairs. Did you actually repent? Have you really honestly and truly repented though?

As someone who was actually tortured himself that is absurd.

Jesus was never tortured for more than a few days. But Hell is eternal.

Actually the Bible does not explicitly teach that the majority of humanity will end up in hell. Jesus does not watch what is going on in hell, He already knows. If you are in hell, the time for repentance is past.

Jesus said that narrow is the path that leads to life and FEW find it. That's pretty clear that majority will not find a path that leads to life, and, by default, they will be tortured to death.

Remember, Jesus is the one who knows what happens if people don't chose "his love". And he is the one who created the alternative!