Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Truth be told I believe that God does not look any different on homosexuality than fornication, adultery, and divorce and remarriage , These are not God's design but and abuse to one another.
Do you know what abuse is ?
Using something or some one for which it is not designed.
Like using your cell phone as a door stop or a hammer.
Using the words of the Jewish Carpenter to belittle others?
WOOO-HOO...one of my favorites! A Santa reference! Things are looking up around here.
I had been taking breaks from this board...cuz my harvests had gotten kinda sparse...but this trip here has been GREAT.
Please explain what you mean here. If , as it sort of appears from reading you throughout this thread, you are one of those who get some weird satisfaction and enjoyment from simply stirring things up, it would help to know ahead of time how serious to take your posts and how much time to devote towards attempting an honest and straightforward discussion with you , me being new and unfamiliar with you and all.
Quote:
Of course nonbelief is faith based.
You have faith in your assumption that the indirect and circumstantial evidence that the vast majority of people that have ever lived found sufficient to support belief...really is lacking in merit as you suppose it does. You could be wrong...since you can't prove a negative. You just have FAITH that your assumptions have led you to the correct conclusion. They might not have.
You can't be sure. Matter of fact, you can't be sure about ANYTHING. Not even that you actually exist.
So, it ALL comes down to FAITH...everything does.
Your attempted point here is essentially worthless. By your definition, a belief or disbelief in anything at all is a matter of faith in your decision. I cant have believe that 2 apples in my right hand and 2 apples in my left equal 4 apples, I must just have faith that this is so. I cant believe that me being almost a carbon copy of my father , so much so that at my granddads funeral acting as a pallbearer some older relatives thought I WAS him, means that I am truly his biological son, I just have to have faith that this is so. If you personally so choose to redefine the word, so be it for you, but others don't have to accept such a silly and confusing definition , which is pointless even if accepted. So you can say that I have faith that creationism is wrong. So what? It wouldn't be the normal use of the word as most use it , which is believing without evidence to support your belief, so what have you gained? Your silly definition of faith and the one most people use are not synonymous, and so useless in any real sense in a discussion, and of value only as an arguing point on your part. I believe that many aspects of the Christian narrative are wrong, from creationism to prayer to the moral superiority of Christians. This belief isn't based on faith as defined as believing without evidence , but in a belief that there is a distinct lack of evidence to support these claims by some Christians.
WOOO-HOO...one of my favorites! A Santa reference! Things are looking up around here.
I had been taking breaks from this board...cuz my harvests had gotten kinda sparse...but this trip here has been GREAT.
Of course nonbelief is faith based.
You have faith in your assumption that the indirect and circumstantial evidence that the vast majority of people that have ever lived found sufficient to support belief...really is lacking in merit as you suppose it does. You could be wrong...since you can't prove a negative. You just have FAITH that your assumptions have led you to the correct conclusion. They might not have.
You can't be sure. Matter of fact, you can't be sure about ANYTHING. Not even that you actually exist.
So, it ALL comes down to FAITH...everything does.
Essentially what you're doing is making the word "faith" utterly meaningless by claiming believing in facts not in evidence, such as religion, is exactly the same thing as believing in something well established by science and experimentation -- such as the laws of gravity.
Now that everything is mere faith, including the argumentum ad absurdum fallacy that we even have to take our own existences on faith, the entire argument becomes moot. If all "faiths" are created equal, then why not mosey off the lip of the Grand Canyon and see what happens? Ah, but you won't, I'm sure, because you KNOW you will fall and die, and that overrides your fluffy "faith" that maybe you don't exist so gravity can't affect you.
Please explain what you mean here. If , as it sort of appears from reading you throughout this thread, you are one of those who get some weird satisfaction and enjoyment from simply stirring things up, it would help to know ahead of time how serious to take your posts and how much time to devote towards attempting an honest and straightforward discussion with you , me being new and unfamiliar with you and all.
...snip....
Goldie likes to think he's smarter and hipper than the average bear.
True. If you dont want to participate, by all means dont be bothered . Again, my point was to see if there were any logical basis for the objection other than solely " my God says its wrong". Most other moral injunctions have a logical basis even if described religiously. Dont kill, dont steal, dont rape , all are evident even without religion even if part of some religious command. Dont eat beef or pork, dont buy alcohol on Sunday, dont work on Sunday , dont cut your beard, dont accept homosexuality, etc, are just religious mandates that the adherents cannot explain their objection to in any other way other than " well , my religion teaches me its wrong so I must accept that".
I just thought it would be nice to point out that despite the publicity this subject gets, there is no more of a sensible basis for opposing it than there is for opposing the consumption of beef or a woman getting a hairdo and wearing makeup and jewelry ( both spoken against in the same Bible that believers get their ideas on homosexuality from).
Love your premise, but it is incorrect concerning the scripture. Although some moral injunctions found in scripture have a logical base, many lack any foundation in logic. The trick is only to pick and choose what you wish to prosecute as a Christian.
The absurdity of scriptural references have been exposed many times. You never see a Christian refusing to serve a cake to a man who worked the night shift last Sunday at Bubba's Bait, Guns, and Taxidermy. Likewise, I couldn't imagine anyone refusing to perform their government job, as required by law, due to seeing big Brenda eating shrimp at Golden Corral. "Sorry Brenda. I can't sign your certificate. Jimmy Bob and I were at the Corral too last week and saw you eat shrimp."
God is an excellent excuse to be a bigot and pick and choose your discrimination.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
