Religion and Homosexuality

[SurveyMack10]

If I voted against a Christian lifestyle, if I preached against a Christian lifestyle, or if I said a Christian lifestyle was 'unnatural', people would yell discrimination against Christians from the rooftops, yet you all keep saying you DO NOT discriminate against gays. Just what do you perceive discrimination as?! Talk about putting lipstick on a pig.....

If you spoke against Christianity on a forum titled -- Christianity, what do you think? that's not discrimination? If I was yelling all my opinions at gays in the street it would be one thing, answering to a post on a forum is totally another. Either way we're not discriminating against it just saying we feel it is wrong.

Most Christians on here don't get mad when yall say yall disagree with our lifestyle, just when we are told how utterly silly and insane we are, I haven't seen someone tell a gay person he is anyone of these things. Just simply, I disagree.

  That is one of the weakest rebuttals I have seen. You are in NO way being held back in this country from practicing your lifestyle and /or living your life in the way YOU choose to.

You asked if I discriminated against gays and I do not. I not saying no one does.

Then you asked how I would feel if my Christianity was repeatedly discriminated against. I responded using the way I and other Christians I have been treated on this forum as an example. None of us are screaming about you all dsicriminating against us, but when homosexuality is talked about in the same light everyone calls it discrimination. It really doesn't matter how many times I say it the point will never be heard, there is a difference in disagreeing and discriminating.

People have the right to think Christianity is wrong. People have the right to think homosexuality is wrong.

[SurveyMack10]

If I voted against a Christian lifestyle, if I preached against a Christian lifestyle, or if I said a Christian lifestyle was 'unnatural', people would yell discrimination against Christians from the rooftops, yet you all keep saying you DO NOT discriminate against gays. Just what do you perceive discrimination as?! Talk about putting lipstick on a pig.....

Christians have been discriminated against in the past and have died for their beliefs.  In some countries they still are!  We as Christians must adhere to God and His Word as we live our life by that Word.  Regardless if it's contrary to popular opinion or not.  This includes what the Bible calls sin......ANY sin.

If a gay person comes into our assembly, nobody better mistreat them or they have me to answer to. Do I wait until a gay person walks into church, and then "blast" them from the pulpit?  Absolutely not.  Do I preach against it? Absolutely!  In our own gatherings with our own members.  Or I'm teaching on it through a Bible Study.  Do I go out on the street corner and start gay bashing......no.  Even when I'm addressing it in the church, it's done with warning for our own people.  Wisdom is always use for the appropriate venue or audience.

I was accused on this thread of not knowing any gay people at all.  If you only knew.  The man who stayed in my house while I was gone used to be gay, and I knew him then.  The only reason I didn't mention him is that someone on this forum knows his name, and his past lifestyle is just that.....past, and I didn't want to reveal anything about him without his consent.  It's a Ministerial Confidentiality situation.  He has since told me I could reveal the fact he stayed at my home.  He's been following this forum pretty closely.

I have people in my life that are still in the gay lifestyle.  Are they friends?  Well, if I'm in Starbucks, and they walk in, and I ask them to come over to visit with me, and we spend 2 hours talking and laughing....what would you call it?  Not just once either.  Lunch, dinner, and all kinds of social situations.

Discrimination would be "shunning' them, or treating that they are inferior to us......ubsurd!  We don't do that. Being in disagreement to a lifestyle and discrimination are 2 different and separate things.

That is the point I've been trying to make! Well said. I simply could not get the right words into the right order.

[jcribb16]

It's a real shame that it APPEARS to us on here that ALL Christians are being lumped together as a "delusional, looney-bin, crazy, stupid" group.

I have never used any of those words, just for the record. Perhaps I should have qualified "you" as Christians and not just those in these forums. As for the rest of what you wrote, jcribb, I keep seeing the same thing over and over and I DO understand what you are saying. However, I cannot get around the thinking that by you collectively justifying your stance because of [any and all] religion and what is written in the bible, you are NOT holding a large number of people back from living their lives. That is how I feel and how I see it.

jordandog, I did put those words in quotes because they came from this forum.  I would like to acknowledge to those reading this thread that those words do NOT apply to anything you have said.  There are 2 or 3 others on here who speak these words freely without respect, so in my irritability, I failed to mention that those words do NOT include you.  Thank you for calling me on it and please accept my apology. 

Also, I must be knocked out by my meds right now, enough, that I'm not quite getting what you are saying in your last 2 sentences.  Please overlook my dumbness and clear the cobwebs for me, ok?  Are we good?   

[Annella]

Maybe I should say something here that you may/may not understand.  Because I'm in a position of Ministerial authority and teach others, I will give account of the Word and how I taught it.  I'm very careful not to "water down" the Gospel.  I must live my life according to the Word of God and what it literally says, as it tells me I'll be judged by it.  I also must teach others out of that Word without compromise or favor to any group or individual who would go against the teachings set down for us in that Word.  I teach many other things besides what is being discussed here.  MANY other things.  It is either accepted or rejected.  It always come down to that.  

Sometimes, even we as Christians have been so brow beat for our beliefs that we are so careful not to offend even when we know it will not matter what we say....it will offend.  We can say it in a hundred different ways, and it still will not be accepted.  Our words are taken, twisted, added to, taken from, etc.  To make us look intolerant.  Since you are not Christian nor believe in Christianity or the Love and Power of God, you won't understand how we can love gays, but not their lifestyle.  It's impossible to explain because you don't fathom the possibility of this, although every Christian understands this perfectly.  It's an impasse.

So.....after saying all of that.....all sides have presented their sides.  We won't convince each other that they are wrong or right, because we all have free choice.  I was blasted because I called homosexuality a sin.  Do I change my stand..NO!  I will always say it is.  Love me, hate me, that's it.  

[queenofnines]

Go ahead and mock the website. In psychology, sarcasm is often noted as insecurity and veiled aggression. So with your continuing comments about that site...it seems a psychologist may say you are threatened by it 

And I can get inside your head one step further -- I myself have mentioned psychology in reference to people's intentions a few times.  I think you read it and subconsciously adopted that tactic because you thought it was clever.   

In any event, sometimes sarcasm is just sarcasm.  It's how intelligent people joke.

[Falconer02]

The bible has answers for those who seek a relationship with God. Go ahead and mock the website. In psychology, sarcasm is often noted as insecurity and veiled aggression. So with your continuing comments about that site...it seems a psychologist may say you are threatened by it

The sites flaw is in the name. Sure it talks of legitimate science and without a doubt it has defensive responses to all arguments against christianity, but it has this blatant and obvious massive agenda all over the tabs on the left that it's hardly a source to be taken seriously. Instead of actually using scientific method, it applies god to...well...everything. God is something there is no measurable proof for, and thus applying god to science makes this site broken from the get-go. All it can do is poke holes in science with nothing to add to their side but faith in one defined deity among all of the others. It is still stricken with the burden of proof no matter how many arguments it makes and really is a moot base when arguing for christianity against people that don't believe in that one certain emotional deity.

I was blasted because I called homosexuality a sin.  Do I change my stand..NO!

It may be a sin, but it isn't wrong. It's just a sin due to religious beliefs and nothing more. Any non-christian homosexual can feel at ease because they're only wrong in the eyes of one deity among thousands. Above that, there's nothing wrong with it. Though abnormal, it's completely natural.

[Annella]

I was blasted because I called homosexuality a sin.  Do I change my stand..NO!

It may be a sin, but it isn't wrong. It's just a sin due to religious beliefs and nothing more. Any non-christian homosexual can feel at ease because they're only wrong in the eyes of one deity among thousands. Above that, there's nothing wrong with it. Though abnormal, it's completely natural.

Uh, if it's a sin....it's wrong.  Do you know the definition of sin?  Look it up in Webster's and we'll leave the Bible interpretation out of it.  Abnormal, but completely natural?  Your contradicting yourself on so many levels.  One Deity among thousands?  How do you keep track of them all.....sounds confusing.

[shernajwine]

Go ahead and mock the website. In psychology, sarcasm is often noted as insecurity and veiled aggression. So with your continuing comments about that site...it seems a psychologist may say you are threatened by it 

And I can get inside your head one step further -- I myself have mentioned psychology in reference to people's intentions a few times.  I think you read it and subconsciously adopted that tactic because you thought it was clever.   

In any event, sometimes sarcasm is just sarcasm.  It's how intelligent people joke.

Lol, I have studied psychology in college courses so I don't need to subconsciously adopt your tactics, as if I need to borrow from your posts in order to make an intelligent and informed statement  

Also, Simone Shamay-Tsoory, a neurologist says that a knack for sarcasm isn't necessarily linked to intelligence. And, you have already made known your contempt and lack of respect for the information on that website, so it is not merely sarcastic humor but aggressive humor in stating the opposite of what you think is fact. Also it is a form of social control in which you are trying to validate with sarcasm, what is acceptable and what isn't.

[shernajwine]

The sites flaw is in the name. Sure it talks of legitimate science and without a doubt it has defensive responses to all arguments against christianity, but it has this blatant and obvious massive agenda all over the tabs on the left that it's hardly a source to be taken seriously. Instead of actually using scientific method, it applies god to...well...everything. God is something there is no measurable proof for, and thus applying god to science makes this site broken from the get-go. All it can do is poke holes in science with nothing to add to their side but faith in one defined deity among all of the others. It is still stricken with the burden of proof no matter how many arguments it makes and really is a moot base when arguing for christianity against people that don't believe in that one certain emotional deity.

The site ISN'T broken, you are just CLOSED MINDED

If I said I refuse to take seriously anything that starts out with, and is obviously making a definitive statement, that God does not exist; I am called closed minded, I am called intellectually dishonest.....can you say hypocrite? 

[Falconer02]

Uh, if it's a sin....it's wrong.  Do you know the definition of sin?

Sin, in religion, is the concept of acts that violate a known moral rule. The term sin may also refer to the state of having committed such a violation. Commonly, the moral code of conduct is decreed by a divine entity, i.e. divine law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sin

Sin- 1.) transgression of divine law: the sin of Adam      
      2.) any act regarded as such a transgression, esp. a willful or deliberate violation of some religious or moral principle
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sin

If we're talking religion, you're completely right of it being a sin. I've already stated this. If we're talking ethics and moral conduct, no. It's not wrong because of the facts stated all over this thread.

Abnormal, but completely natural?  Your contradicting yourself on so many levels.

Am I? Abnormalities are found all throughout nature. They're still natural because even though they aren't seen much, they still fall within natural means and they have always been seen throughout time. Abnormal is like having 50 guitarists and 1 drummer. In that crowd, the drummer is the abnormal variable since he does not have a guitar. This probably isn't the best example, but I'm sure you get it. Unnatural is like a squirrel giving birth to a robot. For more info, check out a decent rational answer here-
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080617063631AADJBxI

One Deity among thousands?  How do you keep track of them all.....sounds confusing.

You're completely right! There's thousands! And if we're talking Hindus, there's millions! Check it out! There's actually some really cool concepts out there.

The site ISN'T broken, you are just CLOSED MINDED

The site has no scientific evidence of your own personal deity. Like I said, it just pokes holes in current scientific reasoning and capitalizes on the bible. And yet the banner up top says "Evidence for God". To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning. A scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses (wiki). There is nothing of this with your personal deity because there is nothing there; especially since this deity is conveniently deemed in the supernatural world. I rest on Jordans words- "A god of the gaps".

[SurveyMack10]

Maybe I should say something here that you may/may not understand.  Because I'm in a position of Ministerial authority and teach others, I will give account of the Word and how I taught it.  I'm very careful not to "water down" the Gospel.  I must live my life according to the Word of God and what it literally says, as it tells me I'll be judged by it.  I also must teach others out of that Word without compromise or favor to any group or individual who would go against the teachings set down for us in that Word.  I teach many other things besides what is being discussed here.  MANY other things.  It is either accepted or rejected.  It always come down to that.  

Sometimes, even we as Christians have been so brow beat for our beliefs that we are so careful not to offend even when we know it will not matter what we say....it will offend.  We can say it in a hundred different ways, and it still will not be accepted.  Our words are taken, twisted, added to, taken from, etc.  To make us look intolerant.  Since you are not Christian nor believe in Christianity or the Love and Power of God, you won't understand how we can love gays, but not their lifestyle.  It's impossible to explain because you don't fathom the possibility of this, although every Christian understands this perfectly.  It's an impasse.

So.....after saying all of that.....all sides have presented their sides.  We won't convince each other that they are wrong or right, because we all have free choice.  I was blasted because I called homosexuality a sin.  Do I change my stand..NO!  I will always say it is.  Love me, hate me, that's it.  

Well spoken!!! And if they continue to argue your stance that's their fault for not agreeing to disagree like adults. We don't have to change our beliefs to suit one another, we can just DISAGREE.

[shernajwine]

The site has no scientific evidence of your own personal deity. Like I said, it just pokes holes in current scientific reasoning and capitalizes on the bible. And yet the banner up top says "Evidence for God". To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning. A scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses (wiki). There is nothing of this with your personal deity because there is nothing there; especially since this deity is conveniently deemed in the supernatural world. I rest on Jordans words- "A god of the gaps".

There are three major areas that have been posited to provide evidence for the existence of God. Thomas Aquinas, argued in favor of the existence of God on the basis of fundamental aspects of the universe such as causality and change. William Paley argued that the hand of God is evident in the apparent design of the universe and living beings. The third line of evidence argues that God makes Himself evident in personal transcendent experiences of people. Of these three lines of evidence, science has eliminated none, although many would argue that the evidence for biological evolution has weakened the argument for the design of living organisms. Even so, there are numerous gaps in evolution - many of which have appeared recently.

Many skeptics believe that all arguments for the existence of God fall into the God of the gaps variety. According to this premise, one would expect these arguments to become fewer in number as scientists make more discoveries and learn more about our world. In reality, evidence continues to accumulate suggesting that the universe was designed by an intelligent agent. The evidence suggesting that the universe and its physical laws were designed continues to accumulate at a rapid rate.

If evidence for the existence of God were truly a God of the gaps type, we would expect these gaps to be disappearing, instead of increasing in number. The evidence is so strong that long-time promoter of atheism, Antony Flew announced in 2004 that he had become a deist because he "had to go where the evidence leads."

It gives PLENTY of evidence.

From OBSERVING that everything in this world that contains information, was created by a form of intelligence, gives a person reasonable and logical conclusions that the very essence of life "DNA" containing VAST amounts of complicated information in every single cell in the human body, that an intelligence created life. LIFE is evidence for God, no mechanism for evolution can be found to have the ability to create information. THEREFORE, adding information to DNA coding to evolve from one species to another is found to be IMPOSSIBLE. Life being spontaneously created in a soup from chemicals is IMPOSSIBLE.

The design position IS falsifiable, since advocates of naturalism could discover a natural process capable of creating the necessary information if such a process exists. If Neo-Darwinism were true as a general theory of biological creation, it would falsify the claim that some additional information-creating mechanism is necessary. The "design is religion, not science" position is not falsifiable because it decides the disputed question by the manipulation of words rather than by empirical investigation. Hence, by the standard of falsifiability the intelligent design hypothesis is scientific, and the refusal to consider it on its merits is unscientific. quote by me from another thread.

Again, refusing to look at evidence because the presenter of the evidence infers God, is closed minded. You can deny it and you can try and justify yourself all you want but your actions and you words show that you have no interest in considering an alternative. You are the definition of closed minded.

[Annella]

The site has no scientific evidence of your own personal deity. Like I said, it just pokes holes in current scientific reasoning and capitalizes on the bible. And yet the banner up top says "Evidence for God". To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning. A scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses (wiki). There is nothing of this with your personal deity because there is nothing there; especially since this deity is conveniently deemed in the supernatural world. I rest on Jordans words- "A god of the gaps".

There are three major areas that have been posited to provide evidence for the existence of God. Thomas Aquinas, argued in favor of the existence of God on the basis of fundamental aspects of the universe such as causality and change. William Paley argued that the hand of God is evident in the apparent design of the universe and living beings. The third line of evidence argues that God makes Himself evident in personal transcendent experiences of people. Of these three lines of evidence, science has eliminated none, although many would argue that the evidence for biological evolution has weakened the argument for the design of living organisms. Even so, there are numerous gaps in evolution - many of which have appeared recently.

Many skeptics believe that all arguments for the existence of God fall into the God of the gaps variety. According to this premise, one would expect these arguments to become fewer in number as scientists make more discoveries and learn more about our world. In reality, evidence continues to accumulate suggesting that the universe was designed by an intelligent agent. The evidence suggesting that the universe and its physical laws were designed continues to accumulate at a rapid rate.

If evidence for the existence of God were truly a God of the gaps type, we would expect these gaps to be disappearing, instead of increasing in number. The evidence is so strong that long-time promoter of atheism, Antony Flew announced in 2004 that he had become a deist because he "had to go where the evidence leads."

It gives PLENTY of evidence.

From OBSERVING that everything in this world that contains information, was created by a form of intelligence, gives a person reasonable and logical conclusions that the very essence of life "DNA" containing VAST amounts of complicated information in every single cell in the human body, that an intelligence created life. LIFE is evidence for God, no mechanism for evolution can be found to have the ability to create information. THEREFORE, adding information to DNA coding to evolve from one species to another is found to be IMPOSSIBLE. Life being spontaneously created in a soup from chemicals is IMPOSSIBLE.

The design position IS falsifiable, since advocates of naturalism could discover a natural process capable of creating the necessary information if such a process exists. If Neo-Darwinism were true as a general theory of biological creation, it would falsify the claim that some additional information-creating mechanism is necessary. The "design is religion, not science" position is not falsifiable because it decides the disputed question by the manipulation of words rather than by empirical investigation. Hence, by the standard of falsifiability the intelligent design hypothesis is scientific, and the refusal to consider it on its merits is unscientific. quote by me from another thread.

Again, refusing to look at evidence because the presenter of the evidence infers God, is closed minded. You can deny it and you can try and justify yourself all you want but your actions and you words show that you have no interest in considering an alternative. You are the definition of closed minded.

Wow Sherene....you should teach.  What an excellent post!

[Falconer02]

Even so, there are numerous gaps in evolution - many of which have appeared recently.

Again, this is a good thing for science to acknowledge. But asserting your personal deity to this is obviously still a god of the gaps.

In reality, evidence continues to accumulate suggesting that the universe was designed by an intelligent agent. The evidence suggesting that the universe and its physical laws were designed continues to accumulate at a rapid rate.

Of course as more is found out the universe, the more problems and gaps there are. And thus asserting your personal deity created it all falls within the god of the gaps idea. We're going in downward circles here. This has happened throughout history with us and nature and putting religion into the mix has a history of being falsified.

From OBSERVING that everything in this world that contains information, was created by a form of intelligence, gives a person reasonable and logical conclusions that the very essence of life "DNA" containing VAST amounts of complicated information in every single cell in the human body, that an intelligence created life.

This logic and reason says extra-terrestrial beings could have done it as well.

Again, refusing to look at evidence because the presenter of the evidence infers God, is closed minded.

Not GOD. YOUR GOD! How many times do I have to state this? Yahweh. Not the concept of a deity. Just Yahweh. Your personal emotional genocidal jealous man-in-Guam defined deity who loves us all among thousands of other deities all with differences. Asserting Yahweh did it is not ID by definition. No matter what loop hole you try to make, making room for Yahweh within ID (other than speculatively) is not ID. So ultmately you will be pushing a religious agenda unless you refuse Yahweh into the mixture.

[jcribb16]

Yahweh:

http://www.hisnameisyahweh.org/