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.
He did create a perfect world...man's decision made it imperfect. If Adam and Eve hadnt sinned, we would all live perfect human lives as God originally intended. Again, that has nothing to do with the OP, so I'll not expand on that.
Sex is enjoyable for all of God's creatures...or at least it should be. I think you misunderstood me. The enjoyment a homosexual receives from intercourse is due to the sensitivity of the sexual organs. That doesnt mean that this type of sex is automatically acceptable to God just because it feels good.
Why is it acceptable to 'god' that a straight couple should have a loving relationship and be to receive the enjoyment of sex, but it is wrong for a homosexual to have a loving relationship and receive the enjoyment of sex. Why can't a homosexual pursue a relationship and have the enjoyment that a heterosexual couple would from it. That seems ludicrous to me that it would be for two people to have sex when they love each other. I wonder what all of those people who oppose gay rights would say if that 'sin' were turned around and it would be considered a terrible 'sin' to live out the lifestyle of a heterosexual.
Why is it acceptable to 'god' that a straight couple should have a loving relationship and be to receive the enjoyment of sex, but it is wrong for a homosexual to have a loving relationship and receive the enjoyment of sex. Why can't a homosexual pursue a relationship and have the enjoyment that a heterosexual couple would from it. That seems ludicrous to me that it would be for two people to have sex when they love each other. I wonder what all of those people who oppose gay rights would say if that 'sin' were turned around and it would be considered a terrible 'sin' to live out the lifestyle of a heterosexual.
Well, a heterosexual is also expected to abstain if they are unmarried. But, aside from that, evidently God feels homosexual relations to be contrary to his purpose for mankind.
Unless you have a desire to please God and to understand him,you will never be able to make heads or tails of this reasoning. Those of us who pursue a relationship w/ our Creator know that it is against his nature to be unjust-we trust him. We just do.
I can present ample proof of the torment, loneliness, etc. that chasing "everlasting life" brings to gay Christians. Can you present proof of the everlasting life itself?
How are you able to not judge people who engage willingly in sinful acts?
Of course not. But my brothers and sisters in the faith who died in Nazi concentration camps because of their beliefs had no doubt about its existence. And neither do I. It is God's original purpose for mankind that they live forever on earth. Someday we wil do that.
Because it isnt my place. Only God knows their heart condition. I've discovered that most people who practice a homosexual lifestyle do not believe they are doing wrong. Perhaps God takes this into account.
If by perfect you mean "a world full of good and evil" then you are correct. God says as much. Where do you get that God created a perfect world (seemingly without imperfections, which is what I'm getting out of your posts)?
Was God unaware that Adam and Eve would sin before he created them?
State and run. Nice.
If it's not acceptable to God then why does it feel good?
God saw that it was 'good' when he created man. He creeated them to fill the earth and subdue it...to live forever. Imperfect people do not have the ability to live forever. Also, God gave his only begotten son as a ransom sacrifce for mankind. Jesus was required to do this because, since Adam was a perfect man, only another pefect man could buy back mankind. It was a propitiatory sacrifice.
I do believe God chose NOT to know whether Adam and Eve would sin. Just because he CAN know all, certainly doesnt mean he has to. Certain phrases in the bible lead me to this conclusion. Many people feel this is ludicrous reasoning but that's okay with me.
Paul said that he is 'captive to sin's laws'. He meant that as imperfect humans we are constantly warring w/ our bodies and hearts to give into what feels good at the time. Sex and stimulation of the sexual organs feels good because God was loving enough to make procreation enjoyable-so we'd WANT to do it.
The entire concept of homosexuality did not exist when the bible was written. That such a loaded term appears in this translation is a clear indication of the translators' bias and willingness to throw things in.
You know this how? There are scholars who would disagree with this. I think it is clear that a man who sleeps with a man will not inherit the kingdom of God, just like all of the rest of the people in the list will not inherit the kingdom of God.
What do you think the two terms mean if they are not referring to homosexulity?
I have not, in fact, claimed it is right. I've merely debated the fact that it is wrong. From where I sit (as a woman married to a man, and no immediate likelihood of any of that changing), it's neither right nor wrong. It merely is. The worst I can say is that IME, it's mostly irrelevant.
Why argue against those who think it is wrong if it just is? I am not quite sure how you know it is neither "right" nor "wrong"? What is your standard of judgment?
If you do not know Greek, why are you familiar with this term? If you do not already know what the term means, how would you even know it is relevant to this discussion at all?
This term doesn't appear in the NT...if you want to say it refers to "male homosexual," then you at least must disagree with TwiloMike and say that "homosexuality" was recognized at the time of the writing of the NT.
This is a really silly set up: if I believed like you do then sure, I'd believe like you do. Circles are fun, aren't they?
I argued in a circle for a reason. I thought it was obvious that if you believed like I do, then you would say the things I am. The problem is that people were arguing against my view, saying it didn't make sense, etc, but they were failing to take into account all parts of my worldview. They would assume the Christian God for a minute, but they would forget about the Christian view of sin, and then proceed to critique my worldview while conveniently leaving out parts of my worldview that are necessary to it. It should go without stating that it doesn't make sense if you leave out foundational aspects of my worldview.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TwiloMike
Over beliefs? No. I don't pester people over my beliefs. I state them if asked, I defend them if they are challenged, if the topic is brought up by someone else, etc. If I have factual proof that someone stands to be more likely than not hurt, then I will say something. Even then, if I'm told to keep it to myself then I will.
We have a different view of how beliefs affect a person then...
Quote:
Originally Posted by TwiloMike
Thanks for that. I feel the love.
LOL...I feel the love on this forum as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TwiloMike
Sure, from your perspective. What of it? Do you see that from militant atheists' perspective it's the right thing to tell you how deluded you are and that you are sheeple? How much do you appreciate militant atheists, who care about your self-awareness and ability to make decisions based on real (not imagined) information, telling you that your belief system is crap and that you need to use your brain? From their perspective it's the right thing to do: they are trying to rescue you from your delusion. Do you appreciate Muslims telling you you need to submit to Allah and follow Islam otherwise you are going to hell? What of it? I don't understand the point of your question.
OMG, yes, I do understand their perspective. That is why I don't tell them they are arrogant, self-righteous, know-it-alls. Based on their worldview, I would say the same thing. The question is whether I am right or they are right. I see discussing the issues as a way or means to find what is really true. That cannot happen when I am not allowed to speak my views without being called arrogant or intolerant or judgmental.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TwiloMike
"If you don't see that I'm right from my perspective don't even debate with me." Ummm....
That is taken out of context, but that is cool. According to Aconite, there is no "right" interpretation, so it really doesn't matter. As long as you read it how you think it should be interpreted, it's all good.
Well, a heterosexual is also expected to abstain if they are unmarried. But, aside from that, evidently God feels homosexual relations to be contrary to his purpose for mankind.
Unless you have a desire to please God and to understand him,you will never be able to make heads or tails of this reasoning. Those of us who pursue a relationship w/ our Creator know that it is against his nature to be unjust-we trust him. We just do.
It's awefully convenient that homosexuality is considered contrary to this deity's 'purpose.' Why not getting off the recliner to stop bigotry or genocide. Homosexuality doesn't even hurt anyone. Why don't people trust 'god' when he supposedly told people in the NT that keeping slaves is okay.
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.
I feel the love.