Reply With Quote
Blake just come out as a already.
but xmas had a post full of lots of important words!
If you know so much, why does it take several posts for you to begin to make a cogent point?
That's not an answer.
Again, why did God create gay animals?
Man was given free will, he didnt create gots, they just chose to be Blake.
How is that not an answer? got.
you gonna ask me out on a date if I do?
Because you didn't answer "why" dumbass.
i didn't make a single false accusation
Coming from the dude that licks ass holes.
Biblically speaking, God created gay individuals.
No he didn't.
Why?
Because one has to spend so much needless time either defining the playing field, getting through the pointless trivialities and ridiculous generalities, or defending oneself from those spewing their ignorant accusations.
That should be obvious to you.
It is to most of us.
Do you believe god is the sole creator of everything living?
Animals are not humans. Animals do not know right from wrong. When an animal kills another animal is it considered murder? man, no wonder your wife was cheating on you. You suck at life in general.
God created life. God created humans. God doesn't create a new human every time one is born.
And gays aren't part of his creation? Most gay people are born to be just that...gay. Sure, we have a few flaming 's who are confused but, I'm in the opinion it's genetic.
The bible doesn't comment on it. It does say that it is wrong though. So if you believe in the Christian God then it is wrong to lay with another man. If you don't then I guess you have nothing to worry about.
You sure as did in the quote above in your post #1816.
And now you come with the obvious blatant lie on top of it.
You're being validly called out on it, because you're not doing anything less than any of the rest of us are doing!
I'm also a christian, and I do find this thread confusing. However, I do have an open mind and wouldn't mind tapping into other people's perspective.
I do believe a man laying with another man is prohibited in the scriptures. That said, it doesn't change the fact that gay people are still created by god. Are they not?
God created humans, whatever a human chooses to do with their life is their choice. But he/she will eventually have to answer to God for the choices that they make. I do not believe that God created gay people.
I reluctantly have to agree with you. I have even had this argument with my father once who was very passionate in his defense that gays are "born" that way, and not from learned behavior of a free choice, which was my feeling about it. I have a half brother with a "flaming" gay alternative lifestyle, And my father took offense when I suggested it was a learned response and free choice, and that the jury was still out as to whether or not this was true.
I'm not gonna sit here and tell you that a man can't be attracted to another man. I don't know what goes on in another persons mind. , some people are attracted to animals. What I can tell you is if that if you do believe in God you can pray for help to remove impure thoughts from your mind.
Colossians 3:5
5 Deaden, therefore, your body members that are on the earth as respects sexual immorality, uncleanness, uncontrolled sexual passion, hurtful desire, and greediness, which is idolatry.
Dunno. Could even be from this universe in the future like in The Last Question. To suppose I know that is to make an assertion I don't feel comfortable making. All that stuff is irrelevant to the point.
You can actually count me among the folks who have a binary way of thinking. I do believe that things are either true or false and that there is no middle ground when you get right down to it. That doesn't prevent me from having an open mind to whether something is true or false. Rather, it does prevent me from accepting that something can be both true for false, or neither true nor false at the most basic level. I have an open mind about outcomes, but not about structure.
As far as the allegory debate went, I'll just say this. A lot of the confusion in the debate was because people didn't proper separate the two dichotomies, similarly to what is holding up my debate with DMC. There are two dichotomies at work: fiction vs non-fiction and symbolic vs direct. That means there are necessarily four logical outcomes: symbolic fiction, direct fiction, symbolic non-fiction and direct non-fiction. Allegory belongs to the first category. Therefore, referring to something as allegorical means referring to it as fic ious as well as symbolic. In logic, this is called an entailment. Something being an allegory means it is literally false but could symbolize something true.
As far as that all goes, there are only four genera to consider: religious theism, non-religious theism, religious atheism and non-religious atheism. The belief systems you list will each fall into one of those categories, depending on the beliefs held by individuals. Atheism doesn't fit into a box, just like agnosticism and theism don't. Those three are on a continuum, just like religious, secular and non-religious are.I must ask, are you posing the grid that denotes deism (belief in a non-intervening god), atheism (without a belief in god), theism (belief in god or gods), pantheism (the "universe" is a hypothetical god), polytheism (belief in many gods), monotheism (belief in only one God), and agnosticism (not a belief, but an admission that for the most part "I don't know"), or something else entirely?
Granted, theism tends to include deism, pantheism, polytheism, and montheism, whereas atheism ("a" prefix meaning without) does not.
There are others I did not mention such as:
panentheism (god exists in all of nature),
henotheism (belief in one god but not denying the existence of others),
post-theism (belief that we have progressed beyond our need for god),
monolatrism (belief in many gods but only worshiping one),
apartheism (apathy towards god),
non-theism ("disbelief" in god or gods),
and anti-theism ("against" all belief in god or gods) to name a few,
although there are quite a few other classifications that I didn't list including the various subcategories of agnosticism,
and ignosticism (that all other theological positions assumes too much about god),
as well as theological noncognitivism (that religious language is not cognitively meaningful).
So a level playing field is paramount here for any competent discussion IMHO.
It might be helpful to all if we defined the playing field so that it is somewhat level.
EDIT: I should probably mention autotheism too because it is what I most closely identify with.
It postulates that even though God is all around us and everywhere at the same time, God is inherently "within" oneself (within all of us) and that each of us has the duty to become as perfect or divine and as "selflessly" as we possibly can.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions