30 Days Forums

Planet Green (ended 2008)

Atheist/Christian episode

  • Avatar of PIMagic37

    PIMagic37

    [61]Aug 17, 2006
    • member since: 08/11/06
    • level: 1
    • rank: Weatherman
    • posts: 26
    Nurol wrote:

    Abortion: The turkey you ate for Thanksgiving did more than a fetus.

    Proof in God: Mind sharing?

    Homosexuality: This is the same thing as racism, or prejudice against religion, etc. End of story.



    So does the value of a person depend on what that person does? Or is the value of a person based on the fact that a person's a person, no matter how small?

    And regarding the other thing, what in the world are you talking about?
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of mrfixitright

    mrfixitright

    [62]Aug 17, 2006
    • member since: 08/10/06
    • level: 1
    • rank: Weatherman
    • posts: 7
    This is a response to message #50.

    This is exactly why the holy book of multiply choice
    is useless for the purpose of presenting any valid
    reason for an Atheist to even consider Christianity.
    You can read into it anything you like and if you
    don't like what someone else reads into it you can
    always claim that he has read it wrong.

    The Bible does not "Prove" the existence of God or
    Jesus any more that the Iliad proves the existence of
    Zeus.
    I was once told by a Christian that if I would just
    read the bible the "spirit" of god would be "revealed"
    to me. I'm still waiting! There is nothing magic about
    the bible. It was written by humans, translated by
    humans, edited by humans and used by humans for there
    own purposes. It is quoted out of context so often and
    by people who couldn't be bothered to even understand
    what they are reading. (Assuming they HAVE read it and
    are not just parroting the pulpit.)

    This dialog between Atheists and Christians isn't
    going to change. It is locked in a perpetual stale
    mate. I'm not going to be converted and my Christian
    neighbor is not going to abandon his faith and I'm
    fine with this so long as I'm not compelled to observe
    his religion thru legislation. We can live together in
    a secular society that tolerates the practice of the
    faith(s) and leaves the faithless in peace. The
    problem is not that our society is degrading away from
    any religious roots but rather that we are slipping
    away from the idea of the melting pot summed up in the
    motto chosen by our founders. "E Pluribus Unum"
    -Vic.
    Edited on 08/17/2006 4:58pm
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of LincolnBurrows

    LincolnBurrows

    [63]Aug 18, 2006
    • member since: 10/29/05
    • level: 7
    • rank: Talk Show Host
    • posts: 296

    The problem with this episode is that the Christian "host family" does not represent true Christianity.   I believe in God.  I have faith.  But I am everything that those people are not.    I wouldn't be caught dead inside a church that had over 2000 people in it and the pastor talked with a microphone clipped to his shirt like he was trying to sell a used car.   Or like he was trying to brainwash you into joining a cult.

    I think a lot of what the athiest saw were a lot of the problems that I see with religion as well, though I'm not an athiest.    I think even if the athiest was put with a family who went to a smaller church, or a more hands on approach, you know, they'd feel a lot better and it could have been different.   

    To me at least, the host family did not represent my beliefs on God and faith.   It was mass produced, recycled crap that is supposed to make you feel good and feel better about yourself.   Over 2000 people is too many for one church.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of PIMagic37

    PIMagic37

    [64]Aug 18, 2006
    • member since: 08/11/06
    • level: 1
    • rank: Weatherman
    • posts: 26
    I was actually pleased that Mr. Spurlock selected a non-denominational, more mainstream Christian family rather than a caricatured, ritualistic kind.

    What exactly do you mean when you say, "I am everything those people are not"? I saw nothing of the used car salesman in what this pastor was saying at all. I saw him challenging his people to take the word of God into the world and bring people to faith in Christ, which is exactly what churches should be doing. He was encouraging an active, vibrant faith that unfortunately is lacking in most churches today.

    What was mass-produced about what you saw? What beliefs about God and faith were not represented by this Christian family? Being big doesn't automatically make their church wrong. Please explain yourself a little more.

    Carrie
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of LincolnBurrows

    LincolnBurrows

    [65]Aug 18, 2006
    • member since: 10/29/05
    • level: 7
    • rank: Talk Show Host
    • posts: 296

    PIMagic37 wrote:
    I was actually pleased that Mr. Spurlock selected a non-denominational, more mainstream Christian family rather than a caricatured, ritualistic kind. What exactly do you mean when you say, "I am everything those people are not"? I saw nothing of the used car salesman in what this pastor was saying at all. I saw him challenging his people to take the word of God into the world and bring people to faith in Christ, which is exactly what churches should be doing. He was encouraging an active, vibrant faith that unfortunately is lacking in most churches today. What was mass-produced about what you saw? What beliefs about God and faith were not represented by this Christian family? Being big doesn't automatically make their church wrong. Please explain yourself a little more. Carrie

    Let's just say that we have a church here which bought out one of civic centers or something.   The pastor (or reverend or whatever) has his own personal helicoptor.   And so on and so forth...

    Religion (however you want to define it) should be- and is to me- a very personal thing.    You have to think of God as if he were your friend.    In that sort of thinking, you say, "Hey, everybody, let's go over to Gods house this weekend for a big BBQ!".    If you go to a church with less than a hundred people going with you, this would be the same sort of idea.  However, the way the "church" in this episode looked, it was more like... "Hey, let's go see God at Madison Square Garden" or something, you know? 

    Your relationship with God should be as personal as possible.  If the pastor (or whatever you want to call him) is supposedly your messanger through God, then you should have as close to a personal relationship with him as possible.    This is hard to do with so many people.

    What I mean when I say things like "mass produced" is that instead shoving everyone into a giant room and saying whatever the guy on stage is saying, there should be a more personal approach to it.   If nothing else, they should break down into smaller "churches" which each have a leader... You know, there has to come a point where one guy (again, the "pastor" or whatever you want to call him) says "Okay, this is too many people to handle at once" and then you kind of split off.   And what I mean, in the same note, when I say about it being like a "used car salesman pitch" is just that he's up there, saying his little speech, doing his little song and dance... But how do you know that's not all he's doing?    It's a lot easier to go to a church filled with more people and just kind of get lost in the crowd... To just kind of sit there and be along for the ride and go through the motions without really feeling what you're supposed to be feeling and understanding about it all.  In a smaller setting, it'd be much easier to ask questions afterwards, discuss things and just be more involved in the church on a much more personal way.   I mean, if one of the families there were to have a party or something, could they really invite the entire congregation?  I doubt it.   But it should be that way, which is just a better reason to limit the size.

    To step off of religion for a minute, just look at the public school system.   Having 30+ kids per class room really puts a strain on both teachers and students.   I view church the exact same way.     The more people you have, the more likely you are to just get lost in the shuffle.   Sure, you can get by sitting in the back and averaging a C, but really, with God, you shouldn't be settling for that.   You should be aiming for straight A's.

    And I just didn't like that the preacher man said to go out and spread the word or something to that effect, like he was trying to convert others, almost like a cult.   I guess that's his used car salesman pitch.   Everyone on television late at night is trying to sell you something.   You go by and see commercials for lawyers... Infomericals for who knows what... And then on Sunday morning you find the show that's a church broadcast and looks relatively the same.

    Jesus was a rebel.   Jesus took the word to the streets.    He found the people who would otherwise not find church, and most likely otherwise not find God.    He didn't cater to the crowds that went to see bands like Third Day and you could barely tell the difference between the size of the crowd at the show and the church.   I'm not saying if you go to church you shouldn't listen to music, but there's just this whole genre of music called "Christian rock" which they try to get you to buy into, and buying into it all you're really doing is trying to convince yourself of something which does not exist inside of you.

    They sit in a big ampitheater with thousands of other people, listening to the man speak but not really understanding him.   They go to concerts of bands like Third Day because they think it will make God happy (I think God would much rather prefer The Doors, that's why he gave us Jim Morrison, duh!).   And don't even try to tell me "Well maybe they just like the music", because nobody could possibly like that.

    But yes.  Church on a whole has become too, shall we say, commercial.   It's not about what it used to be or what it should be.   But I'll stop now before I get another mail saying I've been reported for going off topic.  (Hey, I tried to tell some homophobe he was wrong in his opinion and I got bashed, go figure... It's just the world we live in)

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of frogman27

    frogman27

    [66]Aug 18, 2006
    • member since: 08/11/06
    • level: 1
    • rank: Weatherman
    • posts: 22
    PIMagic37 wrote:
    I was actually pleased that Mr. Spurlock selected a non-denominational, more mainstream Christian family rather than a caricatured, ritualistic kind.

    What exactly do you mean when you say, "I am everything those people are not"? I saw nothing of the used car salesman in what this pastor was saying at all. I saw him challenging his people to take the word of God into the world and bring people to faith in Christ, which is exactly what churches should be doing. He was encouraging an active, vibrant faith that unfortunately is lacking in most churches today.

    What was mass-produced about what you saw? What beliefs about God and faith were not represented by this Christian family? Being big doesn't automatically make their church wrong. Please explain yourself a little more.

    Carrie


    And I would say churches shouldn't be trying to spread their message. If people want it they'll come get it, and christian missionaries are responsible for destroying many beautiful cultures in the name of spreading the good word. Some of us don't want what your selling. The entire world DOESN'T have to believe what you do. If the message had real value it would spread on it's own because the people who had the message would live better lives because of it. They don't. They live the same lives as the non believers and followers of other religons. Christianity doesn't make anyone a better human being, it just subdivides us up into the flock, and the ones the flock is trying to convert. Reminds me of the Borg.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of allybot

    allybot

    [67]Aug 18, 2006
    • member since: 08/19/06
    • level: 1
    • rank: Weatherman
    • posts: 4
    [This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
    Edited on 08/18/2006 3:27pm
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of allybot

    allybot

    [68]Aug 18, 2006
    • member since: 08/19/06
    • level: 1
    • rank: Weatherman
    • posts: 4
    [This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
    Edited on 08/18/2006 3:29pm
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of allybot

    allybot

    [69]Aug 18, 2006
    • member since: 08/19/06
    • level: 1
    • rank: Weatherman
    • posts: 4
    First of all, about the show...we watched it with some friends and it sparked some great conversation about our own "free thoughts". We are Christians. We freely thought about Christ and His sacrifice for us and freely chose to believe. This does not make us any more or less "closed-minded" than the Atheist who chooses to believe that there is no God. Anyone who strongly believes in anything may be perceived as "closed-minded".

    Second, everyone makes generalizations (re: comments by Lincoln Burrows and frogman27). These two are making vast generalizations and judgments about Christians and churches.

    Lincoln Burrows speaks of "mass produced churches": Burrows states, " The problem with this episode is that the Christian "host family" does not represent true Christianity. I believe in God. I have faith. But I am everything that those people are not. I wouldn't be caught dead inside a church that had over 2000 people in it and the pastor talked with a microphone clipped to his shirt like he was trying to sell a used car. Or like he was trying to brainwash you into joining a cult."

    For him to wrongly assume that churches with a congregation over 2000 do not represent "tue Christianity" is ludicrous. I happen to know people who attend the church that was shown in the episode. They are Christians with a strong faith who are growing more and more in that faith through participation in the church. Also, I attend a church of over 3000 and our leadership, as well as other members, challenge us to follow Christ's teaching, to love our neighbors, to study the Bible and to (gasp) question their message so that we can "freely think" for ourselves. They encourage us to be apart of a small group where we become "family" and learn, worship and grow in our faith together. They challenge us to serve each other and be involved in ministry rather that to simply be observers. Unlike the arena church mentioned by Burrows, our church speaks Biblical truth. They do not give "feel-good" sermons, they challenge us to work on our lives to become more like Christ and less like our sinful selves.

    That said, the world seems to think that Christians should "have it all together"...that we preach "everything is perfect if you are a Christian". This couldn't be farther from the truth. One theme of scripture is that we are "nothing without Christ"...we can do no good on our own. God works in us and through us, He chisels away at us to make us better, more loving people - however, we do not believe we are perfect nor will we be perfect until we are with God for eternity. We make mistakes but with God's help we hopefully learn from those mistakes...changing one's life to become more like Christ is not an easy or painless task. However, the peace and hope I gain from my faith makes the journey completely worth it.

    frogman27 believes we shouldn't spread our message. If you had a gift that you know everyone can have, for free, wouldn't you want to tell them? Granted, not all Christians show love and respect for others. See above comment on how we are not perfect. Missionaries play an important role in all faiths - the Islamic faith is growing steadily due to their missionaries. Many missionaries not only bring the message of hope in Christ to peoples but also help them to improve their lives through health and agricultural education, through business loans, through social programs and aid. I agree that Christianity should "spread on it's own because the people who [have] the message live better lives because of it." However, just because some Christians do not practice what they preach does not mean we should not share the message we believe God has given us. You may not believe in God, and that is your choice. But I do believe in Him and I believe He has commanded me to share His message of eternal life with THE WORLD.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Nurol

    Nurol

    [70]Aug 19, 2006
    • member since: 06/13/05
    • level: 3
    • rank: Soup Nazi
    • posts: 36
    PIMagic37 wrote:
    Nurol wrote:

    Abortion: The turkey you ate for Thanksgiving did more than a fetus.

    Proof in God: Mind sharing?

    Homosexuality: This is the same thing as racism, or prejudice against religion, etc. End of story.

    So does the value of a person depend on what that person does? Or is the value of a person based on the fact that a person's a person, no matter how small? And regarding the other thing, what in the world are you talking about?

    I'm not quite sure what you didn't understand. If you'll quote the exact part I'll be more than happy to clarify myself.

    What makes that fetus worth more than a turkey? It hasn't been happy, or sad, or angry. It never talked, or communicated in a meaningful way. It hasn't thought or dreamed or loved. So what makes it worth so much more?

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of sunsokdnfl

    sunsokdnfl

    [71]Aug 19, 2006
    • member since: 08/20/06
    • level: 1
    • rank: Weatherman
    • posts: 1
    Hi PImagic37!!!

    How good is your bible knowledge??? Up for a quiz???

    Here is a website with 50 questions with multiple choice

    answers. All answers are cited book and verse so you might

    want to have a bible handy to confirm the answer. Go to:

    http://www.ffrf.org/quiz/bquiz.php

    Enjoy!!!

    Your friendly neighborhood Iconoclastic Theist
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of PIMagic37

    PIMagic37

    [72]Aug 20, 2006
    • member since: 08/11/06
    • level: 1
    • rank: Weatherman
    • posts: 26
    I'll make this short and sweet:

    Allybot, thank you. Well said.

    Take care,

    Carrie
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of PIMagic37

    PIMagic37

    [73]Aug 20, 2006
    • member since: 08/11/06
    • level: 1
    • rank: Weatherman
    • posts: 26
    Nurol wrote:
    PIMagic37 wrote:
    Nurol wrote:

    Abortion: The turkey you ate for Thanksgiving did more than a fetus.

    Proof in God: Mind sharing?

    Homosexuality: This is the same thing as racism, or prejudice against religion, etc. End of story.

    So does the value of a person depend on what that person does? Or is the value of a person based on the fact that a person's a person, no matter how small? And regarding the other thing, what in the world are you talking about?

    I'm not quite sure what you didn't understand. If you'll quote the exact part I'll be more than happy to clarify myself.

    What makes that fetus worth more than a turkey? It hasn't been happy, or sad, or angry. It never talked, or communicated in a meaningful way. It hasn't thought or dreamed or loved. So what makes it worth so much more?



    The fetus is worth more than a turkey because it is a human being, and no person should kill another person without a dog-gone good reason. Period.

    There are lots of people born with mental difficulties who fit your same description regarding communcation or emotionalism. Are they less valuable than I am? I think not.

    Abortion is a terrible evil thing, and I wish I could stop it. People need to remember that we're talking about people here. Two people go into the abortion mill, and only one comes out alive. How heartless can we be?

    Carrie
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Nurol

    Nurol

    [74]Aug 20, 2006
    • member since: 06/13/05
    • level: 3
    • rank: Soup Nazi
    • posts: 36

    You still haven't shared your proof in God or your justification for hatred in homosexuals.

    I've never met a person who couldn't do at least some of those things. Mentally handicapped people may not understand everything, but they are capable of emotion and thoughts, no matter how 'different' their thoughts may be. That's what makes them human.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of PIMagic37

    PIMagic37

    [75]Aug 20, 2006
    • member since: 08/11/06
    • level: 1
    • rank: Weatherman
    • posts: 26
    Nurol wrote:

    You still haven't shared your proof in God or your justification for hatred in homosexuals.

    I've never met a person who couldn't do at least some of those things. Mentally handicapped people may not understand everything, but they are capable of emotion and thoughts, no matter how 'different' their thoughts may be. That's what makes them human.



    The proof of God is found all around us, in Creation itself. The Bible says that people are without excuse because God's power can be seen in the things that are made.

    How do you think this computer got here, by an explosion in a sand hill? No, someone had to design the pieces and feed information into it to make it capable of doing what it does. Same as any life form around. We aren't just intricately designed pieces of hard stuff and soft stuff, but we are programmed with information so complex that we still don't understand it. Someone has said that if you wrote out all the information contained in our DNA, you would get more books than would fill the Grand Canyon. To my mind, naturalistic theories of our origins take way too much faith--yea, credulity.

    I will not try to justify hatred of homosexuals, because there is none. If there is a Moral Law (and there is), then some activities, though they may be pleasurable, may still be immoral. Please allow me to quote from Jay Budziszewski's book, "What We Can't Not Know."

    "Conjugal sex means self-giving, making one flesh out of two. By contrast, when a man puts the part of himself which represents new life into the cavity of another man which represents decan and expulsion, at the most basic of all possible levels he is saying, 'Life, be swallowed in death.' We cannot overwrite such meanings with different ones just because we want to."

    Our bodies have parts designed for certain uses, and when you use them for activities other than those they were designed for, one of three things happens: They either work badly, stops working, or break. Here we get the consequence of sexually transmitted diseases. They would all pretty much disappear if women kept themselves for their husbands, and men kept themselves for their wives, before marriage and after.

    Homosexual behavior goes against our natural design. It is unhealthy besides being immoral, which is why I cannot just accept someone being involved in such a lifestyle. The only power I have to influence their choices is through government sanction or prohibition of that behavior, and since the Supreme Court took away states' right to punish sodomy, the only thing we have left is marriage. If the homosexual activists are successful in redefining marriage away from one man and one woman, then I believe our civilization will have taken a very significant downward plunge. Then why should we not legalize polygamy or polyandry, multiple marriages across the board, or even incest?

    And now I want to go back to the issue of those tiny humans that we dehumanize with the term "fetus" -- which actually means "little one."

    The unborn human child only has four basic differences with a born child:

    Size: A human is human from the moment of conception, just like a turtle, a cow, or a whale. Scientifically there is no argument here.

    Level of development: After conception, life is a progression of growth and development to maturity and then a (hopefully) natural death. Handicapped people have "developmental disabilities," which doesn't mean they have brain problems, but that there were problems with their development.

    Environment: Some people say, "Well the fetus is not viable," as if this makes abortion OK. Well, you're not viable stark naked on the North Pole, either. Location doesn't determine who is a person and who is not.

    Degree of Dependency: You mentioned emotions and thoughts as what makes people human. Really? What about an infant? The only thing about infants that we know is that their emotions and thoughts are immature. Most of us can't remember anything for the first few years of our lives. Likewise, there's no way we can know what kinds of emotions or thoughts an unborn child might have, so this is a weak defense of abortion if that's how you meant it.

    All people are valuable, pricelessly valuable, which is why it breaks God's heart (and mine) to know that millions are being killed for no good reason (abortion) and millions of others are destroying themselves with sexual immorality. I would really like for it to stop, so I will not refrain from speaking out.

    Carrie
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Nurol

    Nurol

    [76]Aug 20, 2006
    • member since: 06/13/05
    • level: 3
    • rank: Soup Nazi
    • posts: 36

    :
    The proof of God is found all around us, in Creation itself. The Bible says that people are without excuse because God's power can be seen in the things that are made. How do you think this computer got here, by an explosion in a sand hill? No, someone had to design the pieces and feed information into it to make it capable of doing what it does. Same as any life form around. We aren't just intricately designed pieces of hard stuff and soft stuff, but we are programmed with information so complex that we still don't understand it. Someone has said that if you wrote out all the information contained in our DNA, you would get more books than would fill the Grand Canyon. To my mind, naturalistic theories of our origins take way too much faith--yea, credulity. I will not try to justify hatred of homosexuals, because there is none. If there is a Moral Law (and there is), then some activities, though they may be pleasurable, may still be immoral. Please allow me to quote from Jay Budziszewski's book, "What We Can't Not Know." "Conjugal sex means self-giving, making one flesh out of two. By contrast, when a man puts the part of himself which represents new life into the cavity of another man which represents decan and expulsion, at the most basic of all possible levels he is saying, 'Life, be swallowed in death.' We cannot overwrite such meanings with different ones just because we want to." Our bodies have parts designed for certain uses, and when you use them for activities other than those they were designed for, one of three things happens: They either work badly, stops working, or break. Here we get the consequence of sexually transmitted diseases. They would all pretty much disappear if women kept themselves for their husbands, and men kept themselves for their wives, before marriage and after. Homosexual behavior goes against our natural design. It is unhealthy besides being immoral, which is why I cannot just accept someone being involved in such a lifestyle. The only power I have to influence their choices is through government sanction or prohibition of that behavior, and since the Supreme Court took away states' right to punish sodomy, the only thing we have left is marriage. If the homosexual activists are successful in redefining marriage away from one man and one woman, then I believe our civilization will have taken a very significant downward plunge. Then why should we not legalize polygamy or polyandry, multiple marriages across the board, or even incest? And now I want to go back to the issue of those tiny humans that we dehumanize with the term "fetus" -- which actually means "little one." The unborn human child only has four basic differences with a born child: Size: A human is human from the moment of conception, just like a turtle, a cow, or a whale. Scientifically there is no argument here. Level of development: After conception, life is a progression of growth and development to maturity and then a (hopefully) natural death. Handicapped people have "developmental disabilities," which doesn't mean they have brain problems, but that there were problems with their development. Environment: Some people say, "Well the fetus is not viable," as if this makes abortion OK. Well, you're not viable stark naked on the North Pole, either. Location doesn't determine who is a person and who is not. Degree of Dependency: You mentioned emotions and thoughts as what makes people human. Really? What about an infant? The only thing about infants that we know is that their emotions and thoughts are immature. Most of us can't remember anything for the first few years of our lives. Likewise, there's no way we can know what kinds of emotions or thoughts an unborn child might have, so this is a weak defense of abortion if that's how you meant it. All people are valuable, pricelessly valuable, which is why it breaks God's heart (and mine) to know that millions are being killed for no good reason (abortion) and millions of others are destroying themselves with sexual immorality. I would really like for it to stop, so I will not refrain from speaking out. Carrie

    I hate to tell you, but STDs would be here even if homosexuals didn't exist. There are ways to get them other than sex, and once somebody does they can spread it to everybody they have sex with. I'm not sure how it is unhealthier than other sex, or how it's immoral. As for polygamy and polyandry, what's wrong with it from a moral standpoint? The only thing I can think of is economic, which isn't moral. Incest creates genetic problems. Homosexuality does not.

    As for your proof, we are getting to understand more. Out of that, I haven't seen anything that I think will never be explainable by scientific means. People once thought pregnancy came from god. That's not sure. People once thought humans came from god. Most educated people will tell you that that's not true. This is a trend and it'll continue.

    You said the truth about the fetus yourself. They have immature feelings, but they're still feelings. To be honest with you, I'm probably not the best person for you to debate with on abortion. I'm a vegetarian for half of the reasons your giving.

    Edited on 08/20/2006 7:42pm
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of PIMagic37

    PIMagic37

    [77]Aug 21, 2006
    • member since: 08/11/06
    • level: 1
    • rank: Weatherman
    • posts: 26
    In the process of trying to refute my point, you actually made it for me. If everyone would keep their body for just one person, you wouldn't have these diseases spreading around to "everybody they have sex with." Need I say, "Duh?"
    Read Norman Geisler and Frank Turek's excellent book called "Legislating Morality" for some excellent information on why homosexual behavior crashes against the moral law. Married heterosexual men are now living to around age 75. The median age of death for all homosexuals (by their own surveys) is about 40. Why? Could it be that their lifestyle is inherently destructive, and causing them to die much sooner?
    Feelings don't determine right from wrong, and homosexual acts are unnatural, unhealthy, and carry terrible consequences for the people who do them as well as the community.
    NUROL WROTE: “As for polygamy and polyandry, what's wrong with it from a moral standpoint? The only thing I can think of is economic, which isn't moral. Incest creates genetic problems. Homosexuality does not.”
    No, homosexuality creates other problems, most of which are too unpleasant for me to restate. You know, Utah was not allowed to become a state until it passed laws against polygamy. Polygamists have been profiled in the news often, and part of their perversion is that they like to take wives at extremely young ages. The wives' ages go to age 12 and potentially younger. It really becomes child abuse, and for this and other reasons, it's wrong. The truth is God designed marriage to be one man and one woman, for life. When we break that standard, we hurt people in many different ways. Wives lose their feelings of specialness when they become part of a harum. Children, too, lose big. Legalizing these kinds of lifestyles would be a similar mess from legalizing homosexual "marriage."
    NUROL WROTE: “I haven't seen anything that I think will never be explainable by scientific means.”
    That's your religion talking, not your science.
    NUROL WROTE: “People once thought pregnancy came from god.”
    The Bible says it does. It says that God opens the womb and God closes it. He is sovereign in the birth of children--that is, unless people take it upon themselves to destroy these precious ones before they're born.
    NUROL WROTE: “People once thought humans came from god. Most educated people will tell you that that's not true.”
    Education has nothing to do with it, unless you're claiming that most Americans are still uneducated as adults. Most adults believe in God, that He created everything including people, in spite of their atheistic education in evolution from the government schools. I'm educated, and I believe in Creation. I'm one among many here.
    Finally, I will consider my arguments conceded when it comes to abortion. Thank you for understanding the truth about it. When you talk about vegetarianism, though, I think you're confusing feelings for sentience, and God never gave us any commandment to not eat animals. Quite the opposite. There were some rules, but no outright prohibitions (after Noah's flood).
    Destroying innocent human life (born or unborn) is wrong because it strikes at the image of God in man. We are special, and extremely valuable. Animals are just animals, and though we should be respectful and treat them humanely, they are ours to use.
    I love a good steak, and the hotdogs I ate yesterday at our church picnic were just dilectable. :-)
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of frogman27

    frogman27

    [78]Aug 21, 2006
    • member since: 08/11/06
    • level: 1
    • rank: Weatherman
    • posts: 22
    frogman27 believes we shouldn't spread our message. If you had a gift that you know everyone can have, for free, wouldn't you want to tell them?

    It's not a gift. A gift is given without a desire for anything in return. Christians spread the word to swell their numbers and increase their power. They spread the word expecting new recruits to spread the word and tithing from those recruits, and in that process it destroys or absorbs and forever changes indiginous cultures. You talk about the missionaries. Would those missionaries still perform those aid missions if they weren't allowed to try and sell christianity to the recipients? Christianity is more like a virus than anything else.

    And, regarding the nonsense about gay lifestyle leading to early death the site below analyzes that study. Using the same methods you'd probably conclude the same thing about being African. They have an enormously high death rate, and a 30+% aids infection rate, but they're not gay. I had a gay uncle-in-law who was in a monogomous relationship for years. He died of aids contracted from his life partner who was infected in the 80's before anyone knew what was going on. Currently the highest infection growth rates in the US are among black males, not homosexuals.

    http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_cameron_obit.html

    If you collect all of your data from gay newspaper obituaries what else would you expect?
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of allybot

    allybot

    [79]Aug 21, 2006
    • member since: 08/19/06
    • level: 1
    • rank: Weatherman
    • posts: 4
    I am sad to hear that you believe the reason Christians spread the Word is "to swell their numbers and increase their power." This could not be farther from the truth. Yes, there are some groups who are politicizing Christianity and using it for power and wealth, but true Christianity has only one motive and that is for people to come to saving faith in Jesus Christ - this has NOTHING to do with numbers or money - but all to do with following Christ's commandment as seen in Acts 1:8.

    "But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth." (NIV)

    As far as your question: "Would those missionaries still perform those aid missions if they weren't allowed to try and sell christianity to the recipients?" The answer is YES. Look at what happened in Indonesia when the Tsunami occurred. Christians were allowed to offer aide but were not allowed to evangelize and many groups still went!!

    I think you are confusing Christianity with Islam. How many countries are "officially Christian", allowing the only religion to be Christianity and enforcing strict rules based on Christianity? Name one for me? Compare this with the number of countries that are Islamic Nations who greatly restrict other religions. One last point - for evangelical Christians, Christianity is not a religion but a relationship with our Creator through the death of His son, Jesus Christ. It is not a legalistic, money making organization or religion, rather a personal and spiritual relationship with a living God.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of PIMagic37

    PIMagic37

    [80]Aug 21, 2006
    • member since: 08/11/06
    • level: 1
    • rank: Weatherman
    • posts: 26
    First I want to say, "Way to go, Ally!" You once again have pierced the truth in an impeccable fashion.

    frogman27 wrote:
    And, regarding the nonsense about gay lifestyle leading to early death the site below analyzes that study. Using the same methods you'd probably conclude the same thing about being African. They have an enormously high death rate, and a 30+% aids infection rate, but they're not gay. I had a gay uncle-in-law who was in a monogomous relationship for years. He died of aids contracted from his life partner who was infected in the 80's before anyone knew what was going on. Currently the highest infection growth rates in the US are among black males, not homosexuals.

    http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_cameron_obit.html

    If you collect all of your data from gay newspaper obituaries what else would you expect?


    There have been many attempts to refute the conclusions of Cameron's Omega Journal study, but the relatively short life spans of homosexuals discovered by that research seem validated by other research. In 1994 the University of Chicago published an anonymous survey of over 3,400 people of all adult age groups to the age of 59, asking them whether they considered themselves heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual. On page 302 of the Social Origins of Sexuality, the data appear:

    Age Men Women
    18-29 2.9% 1.6%
    30-39 4.2% 1.8%
    40-49 2.2% 1.3%
    50-59 0.5% 0.4%

    Where did all the homosexuals go between the ages of 40 and 59? If homosexuals were living normal life-spans, we should expect to see 2-4% of men and 1-2% of women aged 50-59 claiming to be homosexual, especially if they were "born that way."

    Either homosexuals are dying in dramtic numbers before the age of 60 or nearly all of them are switching their "orientation" after the age of 50.

    If the Omega survey was so severely flawed, then why do we find these corroborating numbers in other surveys? Why is there an 840% reduction in homosexuals between the ages of 40 and 59? Common sense must agree that the Omega findings are not far from the truth.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.