A serious question for the religious types about gay and trans people

[Evangelicalhumanist]

only 8 people were saved in the past, and remember the path is narrow that leads to everlasting life, that's why such a small minority knows the truth, because they studied, whereas others don't..

And one of those (Ham) was flawed -- proving that God, for all His omniscience, is a really bad judge of character. Or at least unable to predict the future, which presents a whole different problem.

 

[columbus]

And one of those (Ham) was flawed -- proving that God, for all His omniscience, is a really bad judge of character.

Heck, 8 is only 2/3rds of Jesus's Own Apostles. Then there are Abraham, Isaac, the Prophets, and such.
That's before we get to the NT and saints and all of those people.
Tom

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

So what? You have your beliefs, I have mine. We don't have the right to expect each other to live in accordance to our own beliefs.

No! This is the crux of much that is wrong with religion in the world

Heck, 8 is only 2/3rds of Jesus's Own Apostles. Then there are Abraham, Isaac, the Prophets, and such.
That's before we get to the NT and saints and all of those people.
Tom

Your point? I can find fault with pretty much all those people. Abraham's begetting (and later treatment) of Ishmael -- on the slave Hagar and with the urging of Sarah, in spite of the promise that God made. What, didn't they believe God? Judas betrayed Christ, Peter denied him, Thomas doubted him. If you can find a "god-like" thread through any of this, more power to you. I can't do it.

 

[columbus]

If you can find a "god-like" thread through any of this, more power to you. I can't do it.

My point was that the God Shava believes in could only save 8 people in the past.
That doesn't even cover the apostles, much less all the other biblical high muckety mucks.
Tom

 

[shava]

You said that only 8 people had been saved in the past. There are currently 7,000,000,000 and there have been billions more in the past.
That is a miserable track record for an omnimax benevolent god.
Tom

You mean that's a bad track record for man, because man freewill to choose, sadly they choose not to believe in God.

 

[shava]

And that is your belief, we all accept that. Now, the only question is, in a fair fight, how would you prove beyond doubt that yours is the one true church, and all the others are false?

Please keep your essay to under 500 million words.

Because the pattern is the New Testament, just study it and see for yourself.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

No! This is the crux of much that is wrong with religion in the world

I don't quite understand what your saying. Many religions do not try to push their views on others, and even within those that do there are many who don't. I will fight against the Christian who expects me to adhere to their beliefs, but I'll stand next to the Christian who's more focused on that peace, love, and other hippy stuff Jesus went on about.

 

[shava]

My point was that the God Shava believes in could only save 8 people in the past.
That doesn't even cover the apostles, much less all the other biblical high muckety mucks.
Tom

I used that as an example, not as an accurate number of those who will be saved when Jesus comes the next and final time.

 

[shava]

I don't quite understand what your saying. Many religions do not try to push their views on others, and even within those that do there are many who don't. I will fight against the Christian who expects me to adhere to their beliefs, but I'll stand next to the Christian who's more focused on that peace, love, and other hippy stuff Jesus went on about.

No one forces anyone, I just give the info and it's up to you to study and see if this is correct and the way the bible says one needs to do to be saved.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Because the pattern is the New Testament, just study it and see for yourself.

That isn't a proof or example.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

No one forces anyone, I just give the info and it's up to you to study and see if this is correct and the way the bible says one needs to do to be saved.

The thing is, I don't buy into this whole sin, guilt, and shame thing. We're human. If god can't get over that fact, I want nothing to do with god.

 

[psychoslice]

The problem with many self claimed religious people, is that they are very self righteous, they look down on all others believing they have it all, that they are special in the eye's of their wonderful god, when in fact these are the ones that truly need saving from themselves.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Who made up the terms gay and transfer? Was it religious people? The reason I'm asking is because I personally know of only human beings residing on this planet. Categorisations of human beings can be most harmful.

If you cut a person up in an operating table you will not be able to distinguish an American from a gay from a Christian.

Even the topic is already 'segregating' people into different camps. For identification of lifestyle it may need to be used but these people are all 'equal human beings'.

Why should we categorise people in our minds saying 'he is gay' or 'she is English'. Just lovingly and unconditionally welcome and accept everyone as equals.

I don't believe in the act of homosexuality but if my family dare mistreat a person who practises it then I would be furious as they are human beings. What people do or don't do does not redefine them as non human or lesser human.

We are all human so let's get away from categorising. Look at the reality. There is no such thing as an American or a Gay, they are not realities just terms used often to hide the fact we're all human.

These people are human and should never, ever be dehumanised.

 

[randomvim]

You might read Christopher Hitchens "Missionary Position" on Mother Teresa. I have my sincerest doubts as to the content of her beliefs, and in fact her understanding of Jesus. And Padre Pio was -- around the time he lived -- highly controversial. He was only canonized much later by a JPII. Various evidences (purchases of carbolic acid, for example, which could easily produce "stigmata") were summarily dismissed, with no explanation as to why.

Fancy. I stated it before but I shall reword. We struggle in this life and Faith is part of that struggle. Even Apostles had their issues and doubts, including one who saw but still had to put his fingers into Jesus's wounds in order to believe.

Belief is not everything however, as even Satan would believe in God. That said I know of the tribulations Mother Theresa had, though my point was her character, good works that she did not stop, and her Faith that she did not quit on. Even in her own words, as they were spoken and written, that you speak of was not present for her (though I'll give benefit of doubt incase I misunderstood your words).

Not at all.

Good.

By "testing," I mean exactly what I meant with the stove burner.[emoji20] I BELIEVE it will burn me -- therefore I do not test it. So if you do something that merits eternal pain without remit, (whether you repent or not later, as I certainly would with the stove burner!), then I suggest that you don't really believe it in the way I believe in the burner. You only think you believe it. And, of course, later you get to "take it back" by thinking you believe in a way out. And not only that, you do that repeatedly throughout your life. Think of me doing that with the burner every couple of months for 50 years. You'd conclude I was a demented idiot.

I don't follow. You are comparing something you can physically interact with to a spiritual existence that may be best described as being in another dimension. Correct me if I am wrong, but you are saying that you would not test the burner and I wouldn't test hell in the same/similar sense as I would not want to?

How many of the Catholic priests who molested little boys (and girls) did exactly that? Go to confession, get the last sodomized kid off your chest, then go out and find another victim? Now pay attention here, because this is important: if you really believed you did wrong the first time, confessed I order to repent and move towards holiness, and then go do it again (in full expectation that you can repeat the cycle endlessly, so long as the final act was confession rather than riding a boy), then you are guilty of believing that God is some kind of dopey dupe -- easily fooled. So much for "omniscient."

See? Cognitive dissonance.

That is not what is taught about confession. I am sure even some mafioso try that process.

I am not one to judge another's heart - but I am upset at various events that another would think it okay to abuse their position. be it priest, teacher, police, etc.

To my knowledge, this world is not easy and part of what I have read about confession, it doesn't just erase your addictions or habits. As I said it is a tool and one of many.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Because the pattern is the New Testament, just study it and see for yourself.

Have you not figured it out yet? I HAVE studied it -- possibly more closely (and certainly more honestly) than most people that I know. And I find it wanting in so many ways, and contradictory in so many ways.

In my view, there is more than one way to read anything, and that is certainly the case for scripture. You can read from the viewpoint of "I'm going to believe everything here," and you will find ways to ignore all contradictions (you'll probably even forget many of them, as if they were not there -- yet they are). Or you can read, as Bart D. Ehrman does, as a scholar. I try to do that (though I am very far away from Ehrman's scholarship, to be sure). I read for understanding, not believing. I look for the themes, and I look to see how those themes are supported -- or perhaps even contradicted. And having read, I conclude that there's really nothing beyond human capacity (and human frailty) in any scripture. Nothing at all. There's good bits -- as there are good, wise or clever humans -- and there are bad bits (for the same reason. And there are contradictions because humans routinely contradict themselves, not to mention that the NT wasn't written by a single human. Heck, even the letters of Paul weren't all written by Paul, but more likely 2 and even 3 or more people. How could they not contradict?

If you can't see the contradictions, I suspect that might have something to do with how you read -- and that wouldn't surprise me at all. But it doesn't impress me at all, either.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I don't quite understand what your saying. Many religions do not try to push their views on others, and even within those that do there are many who don't. I will fight against the Christian who expects me to adhere to their beliefs, but I'll stand next to the Christian who's more focused on that peace, love, and other hippy stuff Jesus went on about.

And I will stand with them, too. Just please be honest enough to admit that there's enough of the other kind to cause a considerable amount of trauma in the world. (By the way, I consider this to be true of any other ideology that is presented with the force of religious certainty, including communism, Nazism, and others.)

 

[shava]

The thing is, I don't buy into this whole sin, guilt, and shame thing. We're human. If god can't get over that fact, I want nothing to do with god.

So be it.

That isn't a proof or example.

That isn't a proof or example.

Have you not figured it out yet? I HAVE studied it -- possibly more closely (and certainly more honestly) than most people that I know. And I find it wanting in so many ways, and contradictory in so many ways.

In my view, there is more than one way to read anything, and that is certainly the case for scripture. You can read from the viewpoint of "I'm going to believe everything here," and you will find ways to ignore all contradictions (you'll probably even forget many of them, as if they were not there -- yet they are). Or you can read, as Bart D. Ehrman does, as a scholar. I try to do that (though I am very far away from Ehrman's scholarship, to be sure). I read for understanding, not believing. I look for the themes, and I look to see how those themes are supported -- or perhaps even contradicted. And having read, I conclude that there's really nothing beyond human capacity (and human frailty) in any scripture. Nothing at all. There's good bits -- as there are good, wise or clever humans -- and there are bad bits (for the same reason. And there are contradictions because humans routinely contradict themselves, not to mention that the NT wasn't written by a single human. Heck, even the letters of Paul weren't all written by Paul, but more likely 2 and even 3 or more people. How could they not contradict?

If you can't see the contradictions, I suspect that might have something to do with how you read -- and that wouldn't surprise me at all. But it doesn't impress me at all, either.

Bart D. Ehrman lacks biblical knowledge as I have seen all of his debates and he hasn't a clue on the bible, that's why he's an atheist. He has been shown to lack even basic knowledge of the bible. Just because someone has a degree doesn't make them knowledgeable about the bible.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

So be it.

Which leads us back to the original question of why even care so much and get so worked up over and so involved with the lives of homosexuals? Jesus said "judge not," yet so many Christians are fiercely judgemental of homosexuals.

Bart D. Ehrman lacks biblical knowledge as I have seen all of his debates and he hasn't a clue on the bible, that's why he's an atheist. He has been shown to lack even basic knowledge of the bible. Just because someone has a degree doesn't make them knowledgeable about the bible.

A lack of knowledge doesn't inherently drive people away from it. Rather, to contraries of both points (that a lack of knowledge drives people away, which would assume knowledge of attracts people), we often find that ignorance doesn't stop people from being drawn to Christianity and that increased knowledge of the Bible drives people away from Christianity.

 

[Whiterain]

I can provide a sensible answer... In the more archaic forms of heathen religions, there were numerous "Heavens" and "underworld" realms a willow of teh wisp would go to.

So say if your a nail eating tranny wants to go Congo with Zeus and train Chimpanzees how to use AK-47 assault rifles for the rebellion, he may welcome you to his realm. It's more about whether or not you are the chosen one.

However, Monotheism mucked it up a bit generalizing the realms into Heaven and Hell. 99% go to the underworld, purgatory or dissolution.

The Lords breath is no longer in us all... Such things were said by the Tetragrammaton... Put your yamakas on, Israel's time is now. jk

 

[randomvim]

Which leads us back to the original question of why even care so much and get so worked up over and so involved with the lives of homosexuals? Jesus said "judge not," yet so many Christians are fiercely judgemental of homosexuals.

A lack of knowledge doesn't inherently drive people away from it. Rather, to contraries of both points (that a lack of knowledge drives people away, which would assume knowledge of attracts people), we often find that ignorance doesn't stop people from being drawn to Christianity and that increased knowledge of the Bible drives people away from Christianity.

1. the last part isn't always true.I increased knowledge would include understanding of how things are read. why the were said and written. what cultural meaning things have, etc. there are a vast number of people who can list me many versus but say they are not Christian. There have been plenty I have come across who can not just list those same versus but explain them, talk about then, refer to not just other parts in Bible but to humans that have spoken on the same subject. etc. etc.

2. I expect what happens to an individual with religion is not how much they know but what they expect about it and what they think they should get from it.