Buckeyechick;697320 wrote:Too bad it couldn't be my right to smack them silly!! I can't imagine the thought process that goes behind thinking it is alright to protest a funeral. It is uncontainable!!!

I wish it were! I'm honestly surprised one of them haven't been violently assaulted. I had a friend killed in Iraq, and I can't imagine what would've gone through my mind had they showed up to the funeral.

Aren't ya'll sick of feeding Durkies and his ilk during these debates? They thrive on it.

Personally, I think they're all closet believers and are just bored, looking for mindless entertainment.

CenterBHSFan;697535 wrote:Aren't ya'll sick of feeding Durkies and his ilk during these debates? They thrive on it.

Personally, I think they're all closet believers and are just bored, looking for mindless entertainment.

Having spent more than half my intellectually-independent life as a scientific naturalist, who essentially lived as a hedonist (Albert Camus would suggest I was one ... and often still am, I suppose.), I still like to hear the perspectives of everyone. I don't mind hearing his point of view and bantering with it. It can be refreshing, informative, educational, or at least a good exercise program for the mind ... which is the most valuable part of a human being in my opinion.

O-Trap;697363 wrote:I'd contend there's more than just an intensity difference between:

(a) Engaging in homosexual actions is wrong, much like when I say something hurtful to my wife.

-and-

(b) Homosexuals (the people, not the action) all deserve to suffer the tortures of hell, and they are the reason for every ill of America, as those ills are God's judgment.

Do you not see a distinction that transcends intensity?



Please know that I ask this purely out of curiosity: What rationale causes you to "feel good" when you do something that benefits someone else? What is the justification?

Moreover, I don't try to live morally to suck up to God, either.



You're assuming that what is good and what is evil transcends God in this statement. Why? Again, I'm merely curious.

For your first sentiment, engaging in homosexual acts isn't WRONG by any means. They are humans, like we are, and should be treated as such. Just because someone does something that is different TO everyone, doesn't make it WRONG, it just makes it foreign to us. That is the INTENSE difference between thinking in a rational way, and thinking on terms of what "god" tells us.
For your second question, I try to live my life based on being a good person. I feel good doing something for others because i know I helped them out and they appreciate it. That in itself makes me feel good. If the commandments said that you don't help your neighbor, you guys would not be helping your neighbor, plain and simple.
For the third question, I don't really understand what you are saying, dumb it down a bit for me.

Buckeyechick;697376 wrote:So Christians do good to impress God?? Ahhh no. Personally I try and do for others because I want to help others. Because I want to be able to bring comfort to them....sometimes thinking of others first is just the right thing to do!

Not so much that you do ONLY good to impress god, but when it does happen, a lot of it is because "god wants you to" or because "that's god's way"..no it's not, it's being a good human. It's what the human way should be and how people should act, not basing your life on books and commandments from thousands of years ago.

Skyhook79;697383 wrote:I'm curious then as to why you would blame God for what a few people do when he does not exist in your mind?
I do not do goods things to "suck up" to God either, because he has already given me grace and salvation through Jesus Christ, I just had to accept it.

I am not blaming god for what he does, I'm saying if you believe in him, and go to him for all your needs, why is this not his fault? Why is this view not his view? You say jesus is your savior, and god gave you that, well in your mind god gave these gay hating douchebags. God gave these terrorists, god gave these abortion babies, rape babies, etc. God is not responsible for just the good.

CenterBHSFan;697535 wrote:Aren't ya'll sick of feeding Durkies and his ilk during these debates? They thrive on it.

Personally, I think they're all closet believers and are just bored, looking for mindless entertainment.

First of all, there is only one durkie here. Secondly, if you don't like the convo, don't tune into the thread. I think it is actually really good/interesting debate going on with this type of situation.

This is the correct ruling.

"I am not blaming god for what he does, I'm saying if you believe in him, and go to him for all your needs, why is this not his fault? Why is this view not his view? You say jesus is your savior, and god gave you that, well in your mind god gave these gay hating douchebags. God gave these terrorists, god gave these abortion babies, rape babies, etc. God is not responsible for just the good."


God also gives every person you listed there the same opportunity at Grace and Salvation. Does not mean they are going to accept it or abide by Jesus teachings.
God does not cause bad things to happen, he allows them to happen and works thru them to his Glory. He did not create robots he created Man in his image. It is our selfish, self destructive nature that does bad things to people and things, not God.

"But Joesph said to them, "Don't be afraid. Am I in the place of God? You intended to harm me but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done,the saving of many lives."
Gen 50: 19,20.

Skyhook79;697617 wrote:"I am not blaming god for what he does, I'm saying if you believe in him, and go to him for all your needs, why is this not his fault? Why is this view not his view? You say jesus is your savior, and god gave you that, well in your mind god gave these gay hating douchebags. God gave these terrorists, god gave these abortion babies, rape babies, etc. God is not responsible for just the good."


God also gives every person you listed there the same opportunity at Grace and Salvation. Does not mean they are going to accept it or abide by Jesus teachings.
God does not cause bad things to happen, he allows them to happen and works thru them to his Glory. He did not create robots he created Man in his image. It is our selfish, self destructive nature that does bad things to people and things, not God.

"But Joesph said to them, "Don't be afraid. Am I in the place of God? You intended to harm me but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done,the saving of many lives."
Gen 50: 19,20.

so basically you just gave me the easy, bullshit answer by quoting the bible. enjoy the dirt when you die skyhook, it will definitely be a letdown for you instead of "heaven"

Im not Bi-Polar. I am a BI-Winner!!!

DeyDurkie5;697634 wrote:so basically you just gave me the easy, bullshit answer by quoting the bible. enjoy the dirt when you die skyhook, it will definitely be a letdown for you instead of "heaven"

Sorry you feel that way but I'm more than content in my beliefs.

DeyDurkie5;697591 wrote:Not so much that you do ONLY good to impress god, but when it does happen, a lot of it is because "god wants you to" or because "that's god's way"..no it's not, it's being a good human. It's what the human way should be and how people should act, not basing your life on books and commandments from thousands of years ago.

I did all these things before I was a believer as well. My belief that Jesus Christ is my Lord and Savior did help me to become a much more forgiving person (do unto others) and much less likely to go dance on tables, be a wild child etc. LOL! But it really didn’t change my need to help others, which has always been in my heart. Now I simply walk a bit of a straighter path guided by my faith.

Buckeyechick;697643 wrote:I did all these things before I was a believer as well. My belief that Jesus Christ is my Lord and Savior did help me to become a much more forgiving person (do unto others) and much less likely to go dance on tables, be a wild child etc. LOL! But it really didn’t change my need to help others, which has always been in my heart. Now I simply walk a bit of a straighter path guided by my faith.

Good response

DeyDurkie5;697591 wrote:For your first sentiment, engaging in homosexual acts isn't WRONG by any means. They are humans, like we are, and should be treated as such.

These two sentences are addressing different things. Once again, the "they" in my statement are the actions, not the people. You're absolutely correct by saying that they are people, just like you and I, and that they ought to be treated with the same respect and dignity with which anyone else is treated.

However, with anyone else, if something being done is how it ought not be done, I would call that wrong as well. In my example, a husband was never intended to be verbally abusive to his wife. A husband that does so is a person, just like everyone else, and should be treated as such, but that doesn't justify his actions.

Under a biblical view, being a homosexual is no different than being unmarried. Either way, a person still sometimes desires sexual relationship in a way it was not intended to be.

DeyDurkie5;697591 wrote:Just because someone does something that is different TO everyone, doesn't make it WRONG, it just makes it foreign to us.

Naturally. The distinction is not made on a "difference" basis. Moreover, in the current society, I wouldn't even say it's all that foreign, unless someone has been living under a rock.

I think it's good that it is out in the open, as well, because it allows it to be discussed in the public square.

However, suggesting that their identity is tied to their sexual behavior (not seeing a distinction between a person with homosexual desires that the homosexual act itself) is, I think, dehumanizing to anyone who would call himself or herself a homosexual. They are people. They are more than their actions. Thus, their actions can be addressed independently from attacking their identity.

DeyDurkie5;697591 wrote:That is the INTENSE difference between thinking in a rational way, and thinking on terms of what "god" tells us.

There wasn't really a "rational" argument in that statement. Most of it was an emotional appeal. I'm not suggesting that a conclusion is without merit solely because of its emotional appeal, but such an appeal certainly cannot be defined as "rational."

DeyDurkie5;697591 wrote:For your second question, I try to live my life based on being a good person.

What I mean is, whose definition of "good" do you use? As Kai Nielson once said, if man has no inherent value (based on a universal authority that defines it), then man's actions cannot have inherent value (goodness or badness), because that same authority which can attribute value to man is the only authority that can attribute moral value to actions. As such, at the end of the day, there is no inherent value that exists between someone who attempts to live a life of virtue and someone who apathetically lives as a "moral slob" (his words).

In a nutshell, as JP Moreland once put it, "The Big Bang didn't belch out moral values the way it did clouds of gas, I'm afraid."

Hence, I'm curious to what authority you appeal for your sense of being a "good person." A hedonist (there's at least one on this forum) would argue that what is good is what brings you pleasure, and what is bad is what brings you pain. Under that view, selfishness is one of the highest forms of virtue.

DeyDurkie5;697591 wrote:I feel good doing something for others because i know I helped them out and they appreciate it. That in itself makes me feel good.

In a sense, then, this sounds hedonistic, because your actions make you feel good, which suggests they are moral.

What if pinching the heads off mice or punching my mailman in the face make me feel good? It would seem a defeater in the view of many hedonists.

DeyDurkie5;697591 wrote:If the commandments said that you don't help your neighbor, you guys would not be helping your neighbor, plain and simple.

(1) If helping your neighbor brought you absolutely zero satisfaction (not even one single warm fuzzy) and was purely a sacrifice, it sounds as though you wouldn't either.

(2) If we were created by a malevolent creator to function in that way, you're right, but under that reality, I would merely be functioning as a human being was meant to function.

DeyDurkie5;697591 wrote:For the third question, I don't really understand what you are saying, dumb it down a bit for me.

Sorry. It was phrased awkwardly, I suppose.

What I mean is, you've asserted that a creator still acts within the boundaries of a moral law. However, if he created or defined said law based on his own nature, then he cannot do anything but good, because he's defined it according to his own default behaviors (there's a theological problem with using the word "behavior" but I can't think of a better word at the moment). As such, he does nothing but good, because good has been defined by how he acts.

A separate being, however, who is given the ability to either act in the same way, or to act in a different way, is capable of acting in a way other than "good."

Think about it like this: God created a board game. The board game has rules, and he created the rules based on how he sees fit for the game to be played.

Now, instead of gamepieces that are lifeless plastic, they are living, sentient, independent agents. God then communicates the rules of the game to the game pieces, but he has allowed them the freedom to either play out the game the way it was meant to be played or to break the rules of the game and try to play it out another way. Even further, the gameboard has been damaged since he created the game, and there are parts of the gameboard where the game pieces (us) can be hurt, harmed, or inhibited from reaching the end (think of it like the building of "Go to jail" or "Luxury Tax" spaces in Monopoly).

If someone, cheating or not, winds up landing on the "Go directly to jail. Do not pass GO. Do not collect $200" space, did God put him there? No. It's just a result of the board being turned into something it wasn't designed to be.

DeyDurkie5;697634 wrote:so basically you just gave me the easy, bullshit answer by quoting the bible. enjoy the dirt when you die skyhook, it will definitely be a letdown for you instead of "heaven"

Why exactly is that the easy BS answer? It is simply his answer. As for some of the people you mentioned above that have done terrible things; the Lord gave us free will Dey, it doesn't always mean we will make the right decisions. That is the best answer I can give you to be honest. I don't claim to come close to knowing all or understanding everything in the Bible. I guess I just have faith.

For what it's worth, if God exists, and if he created me to live the way the Bible instructs, but I still don't go to heaven ... I'm completely okay with that.

O-Trap;697672 wrote:For what it's worth, if God exists, and if he created me to live the way the Bible instructs, but I still don't go to heaven ... I'm completely okay with that.

that's exactly what I'm talking about. you live based on having someone else decide for you. If i lived my life according to what some "creator" told me to do, and he gave me the shaft and sent me to hell instead of heaven, it would all be a fraud to me. As for the other responses, i'll get back to them later, i'm heading out.

DeyDurkie5;697679 wrote:that's exactly what I'm talking about. you live based on having someone else decide for you. If i lived my life according to what some "creator" told me to do, and he gave me the shaft and sent me to hell instead of heaven, it would all be a fraud to me. As for the other responses, i'll get back to them later, i'm heading out.

As I said, if he created the game, then why would it be a fraud, if that's the way it was set up?

It would suck; don't get me wrong.

Buckeyechick;697643 wrote:I did all these things before I was a believer as well. My belief that Jesus Christ is my Lord and Savior did help me to become a much more forgiving person (do unto others) and much less likely to go dance on tables, be a wild child etc. LOL! But it really didn’t change my need to help others, which has always been in my heart. Now I simply walk a bit of a straighter path guided by my faith.

Prove it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vM5n8jESUEk

While technically they are called a "church" they should be called a cult!

If the wackos in WACO were doing these protests they would have been stopped by our government. So, why aren't these wackos not stopped?

How do Christians know that their religion is the right one? What about Buddhists, Hindus, the Chinese, Atheists, etc. etc. or any of the other people on this planet who don't follow or haven't heard of Christianity? Are they all going to burn in hell? God created all this life on the planet, but just because you follow a different religion or haven't heard of it you're destined to burn for all eternity? What about the thousands of other religions that have been followed? What if you go to heaven or whatever it's called and find out it's Ra instead of God, etc. etc?

areyoukiddingme;697715 wrote:While technically they are called a "church" they should be called a cult!

Churches are cults. Some are more violent, more crazy than others, sure. But they are all cults. I love these "whacko religions" because I can see the irony involved with people of other faith bashing them.

sleeper;697727 wrote:Churches are cults. Some are more violent, more crazy than others, sure. But they are all cults. I love these "whacko religions" because I can see the irony involved with people of other faith bashing them.

Purely out of curiosity, what is your definition of "cult?" Historically, it isn't synonymous with the word "religion" or "belief in the non-physical" so I'm curious.

O-Trap;697744 wrote:Purely out of curiosity, what is your definition of "cult?" Historically, it isn't synonymous with the word "religion" or "belief in the non-physical" so I'm curious.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cult

It definitely is synonymous with religion.

sleeper;697710 wrote:Prove it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vM5n8jESUEk

Elaborate.

sleeper;697746 wrote:http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cult

It definitely is synonymous with religion.

Actually, according to your link (along with a lookup of "religion" on the same site), one is religion in respect to its rituals, rites, etc. The other is a set of beliefs.

In essence, a "cult" defined there is a "religion" with stipulation. Related, certainly, but I don't think anyone is disagreeing with that.

Moreover, what I said was that, even going back to the 1600s, it has not historically been used that way.

Actually, if you want to have some fun stand in front of the court house where this ruling was made with a sign that reads "God wants all judges dead" or "God hates Judges" Better yet stand in front of their houses when their children are coming home from school.