Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I thought you would probably bow out and not answer the hard questions I posed about the text. I did not think you would then blame me for your inability to respond.
Perhaps it is you who doesn't know what they are talking about.
I am just quoting scripture. If you had easy answers you would have just answered me. I wonder if you knew that this kind of slavery was promoted in the bible since you told me that slavery in the bible was like indentured servitude.Nothing to do with them being 'hard' it's your attitude.
If you were generally interested I would continue but I know the kind of replies I will get before I even start. Have a good day, I have things to do.
I am just quoting scripture. If you had easy answers you would have just answered me. I wonder if you knew that this kind of slavery was promoted in the bible since you told me that slavery in the bible was like indentured servitude.
I know that confronting the bible in this way is hard, I have been there. But I am more free and a better person for looking at the bible and my faith through unbiased eyes. If you don't have good answers for these verses then I would encourage you to investigate and find the truth.
This is untrue but I understand why you need to believe this. How do I misunderstand this scripture:You know that I am not responding to the scripture quotes but your own views sprinkled through posts. You don't want to understand scripture, you want to misunderstand it so you can use it to make your point that "God is immoral and cruel". Well I will leave you to it.
This is untrue but I understand why you need to believe this. How do I misunderstand this scripture:
‘If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads. Lev 20:13
How is it wrong to question the morality of this verse? If I am misunderstanding this verse and it is moral for God to command killing homosexuals then please let me know. If you can't or won't then I will continue to believe it was an immoral command by God. It is not that I want God to be immoral and cruel it just seems the evidence points to this conclusion.
If you can make yourself believe that commanding homosexuals to be killed is moral then ok. I cannot.Sure, the evidence is indeed pointing to the fact that God is immoral and cruel. It's just so freak'n obvious, isn't it?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Of course, to assert this "obviousness" is kind of like using stealth tactics in warfare, with the idea that one's own semantic or ideological position remains obscured or veiled so that it doesn't get targeted for questioning and possible deconstruction itself ...
... and it keeps the pretense of having an 'appearance' of moral absoluteness at the fore, in front of everyone else's faces, doesn't it?
But, as we all attempt to bite down on the moral and ethical assumptions that anyone TODAY tries to proffer to other people, I'm afraid that in the fuller reality of our doing so, we're going to find ourselves...
Cracking our humanitarian teeth on Godless Human Rights ...
If you can make yourself believe that commanding homosexuals to be killed is moral then ok. I cannot.
Yes, if it is true.And I'm no Reformed Theonomist, so you're kind of preaching to the choir here.
But the fact, Jack, is that if the Bible is true, and whether any one of us likes or doesn't like, agrees or disagrees with it, the idea that God will hold all of humanity to account for all of its sins---and not just for some mediocre sin like homosexuality---is something we'll all have to existentially and subjectively wrestle with.
I don't find much ethical quandary on whether we should kill homosexuals or not.The upshot to this is, EVEN IF THE BIBLE ISN'T TRUE, this doesn't leave modern human rights thinking unfettered ... and this ethical circumstance wouldn't, if it obtains, leave the atheist on a superior moral height over anyone else by which to make substantial, let alone absolute, moral or ethical judgements upon anyone else.
It's quite an ethical quandary if you ask me, for both theists and atheists.
Yes, if it is true.
I don't find much ethical quandary on whether we should kill homosexuals or not.
I agree. But the point you are missing is that if the bible is true then God at one time commanded homosexuals to be killed. Many Christians think that God is immutable so this is the god many Christians worship today.That's not my point. Your lack of having a quandry in this regard is an outcome of your holding the ethical (subjective, not absolute) position that you do.
Moreover, I notice that you don't seem to recognize that neither is this issue an ethical quandry for Christians who focus more, and with better hermeneutical insight, upon the New Testament (as they should) than they do upon the Old Testament. You seem to be oblivious to this fact. And it is a fact. A BIG FACT, in fact!
So, in my own Christian view, I don't see that Jesus would like for Christians to kill any homosexual or any other sinner (like myself) for that matter, whether we're talking about today or about whatever may come tomorrow.
I agree. But the point you are missing is that if the bible is true then God at one time commanded homosexuals to be killed. Many Christians think that God is immutable so this is the god many Christians worship today.
Are you able to put away the atheist handbook and just seriously discuss this? You are literally sounding like a pre-recorded troll. You have a mind, you are intelligent, lets go there instead of uniform answers from atheists are us.You have this exactly backwards. You are claiming that an intelligent being is behind the information in DNA. If you can demonstrate that then you will win a Nobel prize. I am claiming I don't know. I don't have to show anything for my position.
We know information is a product of intelligence, we don't know of anything other than intelligence that produces information.We believe they are products of intelligence because we can demonstrate that they are. You have not demonstrated that intelligence was behind the info.
No, you are not open to God, God is supernatural (so to speak) so if you are not open to that you are not open to God.Nope. I am open to a god claim but if you are going to use supernatural explanations for your claim then you need to show that the supernatural is possible. Something that does not exist cannot be an explanation for something. First demonstrate the supernatural then we will talk.
Since intelligence is the only known mechanism that uses codes and languages it is up to you to provide something that doesn't.You cannot show that intelligence is the only mechanism that uses codes and languages.
. I'm sorry you are not convinced, you might want to look at the links I provided to Tinker that might help.Also, I am not convinced that there is a code or language in life. We know that codes and languages are created by people because we can demonstrate that. You cannot demonstrate this for what you think is a code in life. This is what you don't seem to get
Most biologists feel chance is not sufficient to explain how information in DNA was produced.So we know how life started on this planet? That is news to me.
If you can show how information is produced other than intelligent beings then I would be glad to look at it.I don't know, that is your problem. You are making the claim. You need better evidence for intelligence other than just saying we can demonstrate intelligence for other intelligence so we just need to believe intelligence is behind life.
I NEVER said Christians should kill homosexuals today.On a practical social level, I'm just going to say, "Even if Christians think God is immutable, so what?! What does this have to do with whether or not Christians SHOULD kill a homosexual TODAY!?"
My point is that a God that once commanded the killing of homosexuals and has not changed is immoral and unworthy of worship. Even if that God says not to command it today. Killing people for being homosexual is never moral.I'd say that it has little to nothing to do with it. Jesus has placed mercy, grace, love, compassion, empathy, forbearance and possible forgiveness at the forefront of the spiritual economy, so if anyone is bone-headed enough to try to ignore this or to attempt to work around this New Testament fact, then they deserve all the castigation that can be loaded upon them, and not just because they handle the Bible so ignorantly where the idea of God's immutability is concerned.
I NEVER said Christians should kill homosexuals today.
My point is that a God that once commanded the killing of homosexuals and has not changed is immoral and unworthy of worship. Even if that God says not to command it today. Killing people for being homosexual is never moral.
Simply: “the attribute inherent in and communicated by alternative sequences or arrangements of something that produce specific effects” Sorry don't have the link, I copied this last night and had to leave.You are the one who seems to be unable to define "information."
Even if I didn't know what I was talking about, I don't see how that would prevent you from providing a definition for it.
Simply: “the attribute inherent in and communicated by alternative sequences or arrangements of something that produce specific effects” Sorry don't have the link, I copied this last night and had to leave.You are the one who seems to be unable to define "information."
Even if I didn't know what I was talking about, I don't see how that would prevent you from providing a definition for it.
Thou shall not kill...its written in stone so to speak.That's not my point. Your lack of having a quandry in this regard is an outcome of your holding the ethical (subjective, not absolute) position that you do.
Moreover, I notice that you don't seem to recognize that neither is this issue an ethical quandry for Christians who focus more, and with better hermeneutical insight, upon the New Testament (as they should) than they do upon the Old Testament. You seem to be oblivious to this fact. And it is a fact. A BIG FACT, in fact!
So, in my own Christian view, I don't see that Jesus would like for Christians to kill any homosexual or any other sinner (like myself) for that matter, whether we're talking about today or about whatever may come tomorrow.
Then you don't have to respond to me. It is simply a fact that if you make a claim you have to support it and I am not required to believe it and vice versa. Has nothing to do with atheist sites etc.Are you able to put away the atheist handbook and just seriously discuss this? You are literally sounding like a pre-recorded troll. You have a mind, you are intelligent, lets go there instead of uniform answers from atheists are us.
And this is a logical fallacy. We know information is a product of intelligence because we can show that it is. But to say just because we do not know any other ways information can come about means it can't come about by another means is fallacious.We know information is a product of intelligence, we don't know of anything other than intelligence that produces information.
I NEVER said in any way the the supernatural CAN'T be demonstrated. I said it has not been demonstrated.You are saying that you don't know why or what has produced the information in DNA; however, you are a man on a search for evidence for God and simply claiming that the supernatural can't be demonstrated rather means that unless we have a certified copy of His signature, a signed photo or at the least a scientific paper on the existence of God you will remain unconvinced. So you are not looking for evidence in support of God or the supernatural at all, you are asking for God not to be supernatural so that you can have unequivocal proof of His existence.
And you cannot support any of this. This is just assertion. Also, If God makes himself known to us that does not mean we have to follow Him. You believe in free will right? If so, then we will have a choice.God doesn't work that way, He is supernatural, He wants you to have choice so He doesn't make it absolute that you worship Him.
Ah yes, and now the threats. Believe in things without evidence or be destroyed.So you have set yourself up for your own destruction.
Please stop saying I am not open to the supernatural. This is untrue. I have corrected you many times on this. I am open to any truth, but I cannot believe the supernatural exists without evidence.No, you are not open to God, God is supernatural (so to speak) so if you are not open to that you are not open to God.
No it is not. I am not claiming there is. I am saying I don't know how the information in life came about. You are saying that you know but you cannot demonstrate you are right. It is up to you to show evidence that intelligence is the only way information can come about.Since intelligence is the only known mechanism that uses codes and languages it is up to you to provide something that doesn't.
I never said chance was the reason. I said I don't know but chance is a possibility. If this is true I doubt they then mean that a god did it.. I'm sorry you are not convinced, you might want to look at the links I provided to Tinker that might help.
Most biologists feel chance is not sufficient to explain how information in DNA was produced.
I cannot. But that does not mean that you are right, you need to show with evidence that you are right.If you can show how information is produced other than intelligent beings then I would be glad to look at it.
And that is your choice, but remember your choice determines where you spend eternity. Feeling God is immoral or unworthy is not for you to say, God made the rules and if you don't play, you have no one to blame but yourself.I NEVER said Christians should kill homosexuals today.
My point is that a God that once commanded the killing of homosexuals and has not changed is immoral and unworthy of worship. Even if that God says not to command it today. Killing people for being homosexual is never moral.
I never said that. Do you think it is ever moral to kill someone for being a homosexual?Oh, and so, if there's a God, specifically the One who is the Father of Jesus Christ, His Son, you're the one who's going to hold Him accountable then. I see.
Well, good luck with that! (see Psalm 2)
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?